Kamal Salibi and the "Israel from Yemen" theory

One highly tenuous theory, is by Professor Kamal Salibi's of American University in Beirut. In his 1985 book Bible Came from Arabia, he compares place names in the Bible with names in Arabia today, and concludes that Palestine had absolutely no historical Hebrew presence, and rather South West Arabia is what the Bible refers to as Israel! Moreover, Moses and Pharaoh were not in Egypt, but rather in Yemen! Egypt in the Bible is not today's Egypt, ...etc.

To bring both sides of the argument to the table, I have to mention that I received an email on April 2005 from Dr. Bernard Leeman stating the following:

I have just published "Queen of Sheba and Biblical Scholarship" (AWP, New Jersey) which concludes that Kamal Salibi's hypothesis is correct - that ancient Israel and Judah until 722 and 586 BCE were indeed in Western Arabia. Chaim Rabin's work (1951) (which Salibi didn't consult) on Ancient West Arabian concludes that there is too much Hebrew in certain South West Arabian dialects to be coincidental (in the same area that Salibi locates the Old Testament) . Also the map references, ancient legal code and other items in the Sheba-Melelik cycle of the Ethiopic (Ge'ez) Kebra Nagast support Salibi. Roger Schneider's discovery of Sabaean inscriptions near Mekele in Ethiopia not only confirms the presence there of Hebrews ca 800 BCE but also the narrative of the Kebra Nagast.

There is a lot more evidence, and Salibi should be taken very seriously, even though it means a major reassessment of faith-based history.

I emailed Dr. Leeman twice that I would be willing to publish a one page summary of his book on this site. I have not yet heard from him.



the wonders of history

I am an American who happened to buy a work of fiction off of a supermarket shelf. This is something I rarely if ever do. After reading the book, 'The Alexandria Link,' by Steve Berry I was fascinated by many of the topics and theories it raised regarding the true placement of many historical happenings. I have never researched or studied in serious depth any of these things, though I can say I have read the and studied many current versions of the Christian Bible. Nothing spectacular, but I have to start somewhere. After reading this work of fiction though it brought to mind many questions and I had to find out more...finding this page was very refreshing...I look forward to learning more...I only hope that more people will be open to alternate versions of history until we can all be enlightened. Everyone thinks they are the only ones with the truth. The only thing I know about the truth is that everyone has a different view when the same thing happens, but in the end the truth always reveals itself...and usually it angers many people when this happens.
Thank you for letting me share my thoughts...I am no scholar, but have a deep appreciation for the history of our world and civilization as a whole.

I have just finished the

I have just finished the same book and I am thrilled that people will through fiction be able to see what would appear to be the truth about where Israel was in ancient times. It just makes sense.


Wait a minute ...

History is history and fiction is fiction. The two are very separate domains.

History, like any academic discipline has scientific methodologies to ensure that the findings are scientifically sound.

Fiction is known from the start to be, well, fictional, just for entertainment.

Trying to mould history from fiction is just plain absurd. This is where Dan Brown's DaVinci Code gets us. It is fun as long as it is seen for what it is, but any attempt to take it as real is flawed and even dangerous.

Same goes for the Alexandria Link book as well.
Khalid Baheyeldin

History: true or false? Some

History: true or false?

Some years back, I started going back to the "beginning" of the history of my country, I tell you, it was amazing what I found. I came to the conclusion, that History is not only facts, but lots of emotions. Because according to the autors (They are the only "evidence-providers" we have nowadays! If you are not yourself studying archaeology-what I believe many do not. I myself don't!)you read, they would speak about an historical event from many different views, from THEIR VIEW. And this of course influences one.

So fellows, let us be hungry of knowing, assimilating and making our own VIEWS! History has been made and is being made! Some details (the devil is in the details, but still!) will only remain guessed and some are so obvious that all some can get to it...

To all history-interested!

It is more about a historical exchange right? So I am done with the works: Who Was Jesus?: Conspiracy in Jerusalem,London, I.B. Tauris, 1988
and A House of Many Mansions - The History of Lebanon Reconsidered, I.B. Tauris, 1993

If you guys have some time, read them. Very refreshing books...Lots of enlightening and interesting ideas...

Read lot, stay you and enjoy imagining you there!

None of this is surprising

None of this is surprising to me. I do wonder what really is the truth of it all. But I also have to wonder if it matters. Since each religion traces its history back to one father- Abraham, and God promised the land to him and his descendants, why does it matter which actual piece of property "His People" hold? Aren't we all God's chosen people, since we are all of the same family line? I know everyone will argue that there are specific descendants and not all should inherit, but I can't make myself believe that God, or Allah, meant to be that picky. I think it's the human spin on it that turned it into an argument.
But, in the end, I'm dying of curiousity and would love for the truth to be revealed.


I do not think that the facts as laid out in the Alexandria Link could be called revisionism at this point. I was trained in history. There are too many valid points raised in this book and in any even superficial reading of the history of the Asir area of SW Arabia. After the Salibi book was released there was a total village clearance in that part of SW Arabia. This was done by the government and done in the hope of destroying any historical or archaelogical evidence in the area. If you need a reason for this so called action consider this.....if the Hebrews did come from the Asir area as is alleged it would create total chaos in the world and disrupt at least 2 countries. Can you visualize the carnage and chaos when the Hebrews or Jews came from the area around one of Islams holiest sites? Those who claim this is pure revisionism of history are jumping the gun, much has to be studied in situ and is history and many other disciplines before claiming this is a forgery of material or revisionism history. And until or unless the Saudi government will allow unhindered access to the area and any associated facts from any site or library having knowledge of any thing involved in this area...THIS STORY will not go away and cannot be catalogued as a myth or revisionist history.

Conspiracy too?

The Saudis cleared the site so Jews can't claim it?

So now we have conspiracy in addition to the pseudo-science?

Looks like a nice setting for the next Indiana Jones movie ...

There are far simpler explanations to this: not the least, Sabaean and Hebrew, along with Arabic being all semitic languages and having a lot in common.

No Chaos with Knowledge

In response to the article which suggests that chaos would emerge from discovering details about the Land of Abraham, I say that chaos has already happened by creating a homeland for the European non-semitic Jews in the land of authentic semitic natives of the Holy Land. It was the creation of the Modern Israel that started the chaos and yet the problem is endemic for over sixty years now and counting. I personally do not believe in wars to conquer and correct history, but the misery still presents a great danger to the future of the region. To the scholars who think this would attract the Israeli ambitions to Saudi Arabia I say the the Modern Israelis do not have rights in Palestine nor anywhere else in the Middle East. Palestine was inhabited by Palestinians since the dawn of times and they did not come from Arabia. It was the Jews who came from Arabia after the Mesopotamian invasions and Palestinians were not Moslem before Islam. What were they? Where did the Christians of Palestine come from? Have we believed that the Palestinian moslems all came from Arabia? I do not think so because the Islamic accounts talk about ten thousand Moslem warriors. Did these warriors outburst from Meccah to conquer the East and the West in only one hundred years? The reasonable thinking is that the Islamic conquests were successful because the word of social justice was spread and because the conquests made snowball effect. The people of Palestine spoke and understood their language and welcomed the newcomers from Meccah. They were the Jews who stayed in Palestine after the Roman persecution and became Christian then Moslem. This is a chapter that is forgotten from the history of Palestine because the Israelis are imposing the terms of what should be taught in the schools, in their peace negotiations with the Arabs.

Comments on Noureddine of Florida abt the origin of Palestinians

The Palestinians came from Arabia and specifically
from the Hijaz Coast which was called 3000yrs ago: "Coast of Kanan" and which was inhabited by
tribes called Kananah bin Madhar. Worthmentioning,
to the south of the Coast of Kanan there were the Banu Israel who were on severe conflict with the Kananites. Part of the Kananites were the tribe Tai. This tribe was worshipping a god called Filis.
This god was known as "Filis Tai". When this tribe
started migration to the Sham i.e. the North, 3000-4000yrs ago; the pioneers named the region where they settled "Filis+Tai+N"= Filistine. The letter
noon was added automatically; because in the grammer of Arabic Yemeni Languages or Tongues at that time you can derive a name by adding the letter noon like Adnan from adan and Qahtan from
Qaht and so on.
Mohammad Essa Sirhi

The origine of the name Palestine

To comment on Mr' Mohammad Issa Sirhi on the origin of the Palestinians, I agree with the fact that they came from the West Arabian Coast before the Isarelites but also gradually over several millenia. Palestine in the target land of al Migrations from Hijaz since the dawn of History while the Isarelites stayed in their original kingdom. But the name Palestine is not Arabian, it is "Hebrew" as the tongue of the Isarelites in Babylon made it "different" from the tongue of Arabia (It was in Babylon that the language of Arabia was READ from the old scrolls, after generations of oblivion and then was dubbed "Hebrew.") So, when the Isarelites were brought from Babylon to Palestine in the sixth century BC, they launched names on the regions that resemble the Biblical description. That is how the name of Philishtim was created, in addition to the names of Sinai, Arabah, Moab, Sham, Lubnan... and Misrim. Modern Historians relate the name of Philishtim to the historic Phalashat of Ethiopia who fought the Israelites on the South Western coast of Arabia on the Red Sea.