It is, or should be, the scholastic and academic will of the author of any works, to give to the reader, researcher and seeker, the utmost qualitative information in the specific project that he/she undertakes. The final product of the project should be methodologically sound in that the “who’s, what’s, when’s, where’s, why’s”, and “how’s”, should be completely covered and the works thusly fulfilled.
The first chapter of this book brings us all, the author, the reader, the researcher, etc., to the point of a rather interesting conundrum and it is because of this conundrum, this author thought it best to begin this book with this topic. The reason why this author calls this chapter a conundrum is because it deals with the origins of Man’s descent from a sacred mystical and mythical mountain and unbeknown to most, this mystical mountain formulates the basis of many myths pertaining to the origins of Man and so to exclude it from such an important work, would be likened to omitting the number zero from the numerical system that we use today. For instance, in subtraction 2 – 2 = 0. Now, in this world of pragmatic empiricism (i.e., hard evidence), zero has no backing by which it exists as nothing cannot produce anything. So the real question becomes, how then can zero produce the number one? Without getting into the complexities of quantum physics or anything in that regard, the point is to stress that, how is that 2 – 2 equals zero (0) or nothing and, how can anything like the number 1 for example, come from zero when 0 – 0 and 0 + 0 = nothing? What is the origin of the zero? How does one define that which he/she cannot perceive nor knows by which it produces some-thing which in this instance; is the very next thing or number, one?
Conversely, the physical origins of Man give us an equally enigmatic conundrum as does the number zero (can we really call it a number?). This author wants to be clear when he says “the physical origins of man” he means that he is not speaking from a doctrinal perspective (religious in general) or a scientific perspective (scientists only have theories as to Man’s physical origins on the earth, nothing concrete), although it is scientific fact that all things exist on the quantum level and manifest downwardly to become physical. No, this author means – what are Man’s earthly origins? From what part of the planet did men first appear? How physical Man got here is another book in and of itself but this book, more specifically this chapter, seeks to identify, collect, compare, and weigh through preponderance, the seemingly universal myth pertaining to Man’s physical location and how Man spread throughout the earth.
What this author will show in this regard, is by no means to be taken as a wholly factual rendering. Conversely, it also should not be dismissed as a fallacious rendering either, hence, the conundrum. In the same way one has to postulate on why they believe that from zero comes one, is the same way that we should look at the evidence presented henceforth in this chapter. That is to say, the number one exists, and so does Man, but the paradisiacal myths which is the makeup of the very topic of this chapter in its own way, represents the number zero that we alluded to a few paragraphs back.
This author’s research has inexorably lead him to find the one thread that inextricably weaves itself through the mythical origins of Man and because of this thread, this chapter is named such. The “Sacred Mount” whose earliest appellation appears to be “Meru”, also appears to be the source of many mythoi dating back thousands of years. It is here where we will start to put the pieces of this perplexing puzzle together and make connections that probably have never been made in the manner that this chapter and this book in general will undertake. Prophet Noble Drew Ali informs us in the Americanized Holy Koran of the Moorish Science Temple of America Ch. 47, in part, that:
“The inhabitants of Africa are the descendants of the ancient Canaanites from the land of Canaan. Old man Cush and his family are the first inhabitants of Africa who came from the land of Canaan…The dominion of Cush, North-East and South-East Africa and North-West and South-West was his father’s dominion of Africa. In later years, many of their brethren from Asia and the Holy Lands joined them. The Moabites from the land of Moab who received permission from the Pharaoh’s of Egypt to settle and inhabit North-West Africa; they were the founders and are the true possessors of the present Moroccan Empire. With their Canaanite, Hittite, and Amorite brethren who sojourned from the land of Canaan seeking new homes. Their dominion and inhabitation extended from North-East and South-West Africa, across great Atlantis even unto the present North, South, and Central America and also Mexico and the Atlantis islands; before the great earthquake which caused the great Atlantic Ocean.” [Added emphasis mines]
There are so many different things that can be touched upon in the above which will be noted in later chapters of this book, however, I cited the portion of that chapter of the Moorish Holy Koran to stick to the theme of this particular chapter as it is extremely important when weighed and compared with other authors investigations into similar claims. In this author’s research in relation to this chapter, a book of critical importance to this topic must be referenced. The name of this book is called in part “Har-Moad: or the Mountain of the Assembly” written in 1891 by Orlando Dana Miller and Stephen Munson Whipple.* They observe:
“…note the great Hamite-Cushite race from the East was the first to settle Egypt and Babylon; that this bible race can be traced to the Mount Meru, on the high table-lands of Central Asia; that the races emigrating from that region can be traced from thence, to the four quarters of the earth, and that however widely separated, they can be re-traced to their common home, – the Eden of Genesis”[Added emphasis mines]
You can clearly see the similarities in the information that Prophet Noble Drew Ali gave to us and the research from the aforementioned source and how they match up in regards to the Moors of Cushite and Hamite origins coming from the east and inhabiting what we know today as Africa. What is unique about the latter however, is that that those researchers cite Mount Meru as the source of these, our great ancestors who came from a central location, and then inhabited the rest of the world. How was this conclusion derived? We will not render speculation for those researchers however, their works are also centered on this mythical mountain and so their works are critical in this regard.
Several 18th, 19th, and early 20th century works claim that Mount Ararat (or the Mountains of Ararat) of Biblical fame (Gen. 8:4) is comparable to an early myth pertaining to the Sacred Mount Meru (also related to the Garden of Eden as Har-Moad cites above). In the Biblical narrative, Noah’s Ark comes to rest on Mt. Ararat and from henceforward, the races of men repopulate the earth. Surely, we should all by now in these days and times, know that the Noah story of the Biblical narrative is mythoi par excellence and cannot be considered a historical event but a mere fabrication by the early codex writers of what we call the Torah that was adopted into the Christians bible. The point to note is that as Miller and Whipple stated above, we have the similar accounts that men from a sacred mount were the populates of the earth-land and the fact that he calls them Hamite-Cushite is even more intriguing when you consider the year that these men of European descent, during a time of intellectual racism, wrote this work (1891). Druscilla Dunjee Houston in her monumental works cites the same claims. She says on page 29 that:
“In those primitive days, the central seat of Ethiopia was not the Meroe of our day, which is very ancient, but a kingdom that preceded it by many ages; that was called Meru. Lenormant spoke of the first men of the ancient world as “Men of Meru.” Sanskrit writers called Indra, chief god of the Hindu, king of Meru. He was deified and became the chief representative of the supreme being. Thus was primitive India settled by colonists from Ethiopia. Early writers said there was very little difference in the color or features of the people of the two countries. Ancient traditions told of the deeds of Deva Nahusha, another sovereign of Meru, who extended his empire over three worlds. The lost literature of Asia Minor dealt with this extension of the Ethiopian domain. An old poem “Phrygia,” was a history of Dionysus, one of the most celebrated of the old Ethiopians.” [emphasis mines]
As we clearly see in the above, Dunjee Houston cites several early scholars who too gave credit to Meru as being the source of physical man while maintaining, even to a point of possibly not understanding the paradisaical myth pertaining to the mythical mountain herself, that the people who occupied primitive India were in fact Cushites or so-called Ethiopians. In the above citation, we see where sister Dunjee Houston makes an allusion that the Meroe of our day is, in name, merely a copy of a much older civilization. This is highlighted in William F. Warren’s 1855 works where he states:
“Now, just as Christians love to localize in their own midst their “Holy Places,” so the early nations of the world loved to create miniature reproductions of Eden… This was eminently true of the sacred architecture of the Babylonians, Egyptians, Hebrews, and Chinese. Koeppen assures us that “every orthodoxly constructed Buddhist temple either is, or contains, a symbolical representation of the divine regions of Meru, and of the heaven of the gods, saints, and Buddhas, rising above it.”
“In mount Meros we have only the Greek form of Meru, as long ago shown by Creuzer. The one is the Navel of the Earth for the same reason that the other is. Egyptian Meroë (in some Egyptian texts Mer, in Assyrian Mirukh, or Mirukha), the seat of the famous oracle of Jupiter Ammon, was possibly named from the same “World-Mountain.” This would explain the passage in Quintus Curtius, which has so troubled commentators, wherein the object which represented the divine being is described resembling a “navel set in gems.” [Added emphasis mines]
In the above, this “Mer” is cited as another name for Meru. We will show you something seminal in this regard forthcoming. Wilford (1761-1822), in his Asiatic Researches noted that according to the Puranics (ancient Hindu records) that the “first climate is that of Meru” and that among the Greeks and the Romans the “first climate was that of Meroë.”
We can retrace back to early Hamite-Cushite civilizations like the Harrapan and the conclusive Cushite foundations of those early Indic civilizations however, that would be superfluous at this point as our main issue is Mount Meru. As to not give the appearance of being vague, I will implore the researcher however, to independently find the Moorish/Cushite origins of the Indic civilization. The aforementioned scholar Druscilla Dunjee Houston has a wonderful chapter dedicated to this Cushite Indic culture along with several contemporary scholars of our day which will bring you about many works in that regard.
In modern academia, Mount Meru is now restricted to the Indic or Buddhic cultures of the East without the Cushite or Moorish element present. In Sanskrit, this mythical mountain is called Šumeru. The approbatory (expressive) prefix su-, resulting in the meaning “excellent Meru” or “wonderful Meru” and also we have another compounded epithet “Mahameru” e.g. “Great Meru”. The Matsya Purana and the Bhāgvata Purāna (purāṇa means, “of ancient times” in Sanskrit) along with several other Hindu texts greatly exaggerate the height of Mount Meru which obviously signifies its importance in their own mythoi. In looking at the word Šumeru how can we not then notice the word we have today as “Sumer”? The Akkadian language gives us the word Šumeru which forms our word Sumer today, which is said to be from the Sumerian (the older culture) who were called ki-en-ĝir, which is thought to mean “land of the civilized kings” or “native land” or even “Land of the Lords of Brightness”. Various searches will turn up the same possibilities but what is interesting to note is that the Akkadians are thought to be of a different stock than the Sumerians and we find that the Sumerians, as noted above called themselves ki-en-ĝir but the Akkadians called them Šumeru. Several theories can be found as to why Assyriologists believe such however, we are not here to clarify or harp on that point more than to bring attention to the very name Šumeru and how much it linguistically relates to the word Sumer. This author will not enlarge on the “race” of the original Sumerians as it can be found that the original peoples of this land were what Whipple and Miller called on page 10, “Hamite-Cushites”. The European Bible gives us the clearest indication of this by stating that a man named Chushan or Cushan-Rishathaim which translates as “Cushite (Ethiopian) of double wickedness” who was ruler of Aram Naharaim which is situated in Northwest Mesopotamia (Sumer, Chaldea, Akkadia), was, according to the biblical narrative, the first oppressor of the Biblical Israelites (Judges 3:8), and so ethnicity, if we are using that term is clear, and again, it would be redundant at this point to harp on the racial aspect in detail.
The very fact that the Hindu Puranas cite the very first men of the world as sovereign’s of Meru according to Houston and several early authors, and that the Sumerians are, based on transliterations, thought to be “lords” and “kings”, and that in fact Meru is a mountain called Šumeru “excellent or great Meru”, brings us to the most intriguing of correlations in this regard.
First of all, we must also point out that the word “Berber” is a synonym for Moor. It appears that the word Berber is connected to this sacred mount as well.. The Akkadians spoke what we call today a “Semitic” (the proper term would be “Canaanite”) dialect and call the nose or summit of the mountain bur bur. This author will detail this aspect in a separate addendum to this summary-treatise. It is no coincidence that the word Moor in Arabic translates as Berberi. But what appears more profound is that we seem to, linguistically at least; find a variation of this name Berber associated with this mythical mountain. We will highlight this aspect in the broad works of this subject in the actual book that this chapter is extracted from.
We find in the Egyptian hieroglyphs, the word Meru to mean “mountain” as you will see evinced in figure 1 below. Another interesting parallel to note is that in the Egyptian glyphs, the very name for pyramid phonetically is M-R and the fact that the pyramids merely appear to be renditions of man-made mountains, makes for an even intriguing case for the Meru connection. What is also of note is that the name Meru or a variant transliterated as Mer, which was touched on in the above as an alternative name for Meru, is also the title of high chiefs, overseers, and Sheiks (lords) in the Egyptian tongue.
Notice in the very last definition shown above, the word cited translates as “Heads of families, Sheiks of tribes”. Sheik is an ancient title that was used long before the Mohammedanism took hold. Sheik is also a title in the Moorish Science Temple of America for we are what are ancient forefathers were without doubt or contradiction. Also, in Budge’s translations, we find this Mer attached to names of Gods to mayors of cities. This name obviously holds some importance and this author believes that it is attached with the very name Moor that we have today.
In the English that we speak today, an overseer which would be a manager in so many words, is akin to a “Lord” or “Chief”. This then brings us to another interesting and almost extraordinary correlation with the word “Lord” in the Aramaic language lexicon, which, when transliterated back into the English, gives us the word “Mori” or “Mari” which is also the way the name Moor was said in the ancient vernaculars of several languages. You will even see the name variant to “Mary” and “Maria,” names of the mother of Isa who is called Jesus, the Lord (Click here for linguistic matches). Again, this author wants to stress and will continue to stress this; these finds are merely a preponderance of the evidence insomuch as, the evidence provided holds the necessary weight to support the authors claims. We welcome any point for point rebuttals to this tract.
What are the odds that we have this mystical mountain Meru being cited as an early name for “mountain” in the Egyptian hieroglyphs? It is this researcher’s opinion that the Egyptian pyramids are skillful renderings of a man made mountain which was the conclusion of several researchers as we will undoubtedly note in this chapter, and as mountains stand, so too has our pyramids stood the test of time. On the point of Mt. Meru and Meru being a name for a mountain among the ancient Egyptians, can we simply chalk this up to linguistic happenstance or an eager researcher’s linguistic conflations? This author has six strict critics who will not let him venture off of the deep end; these six critics are “who, what, when, where, why”, and “how”. Not surprisingly, the Egyptian word “M(e)r” has the determinative showing a triangle with a base to represent the pyramid.
The theory espoused by this author that the Egyptian pyramids are in the likeness of the mythical Mount Meru is not just this authors wild eyed speculations, but from painstaking research, this author has found instances where other earlier (more qualified) researchers have indeed concluded the same. In an article published in 1819 in Blackwood’s Edinburgh Magazine, Volume 5, entitled “Mr. Faber on the Pyramid of Cephrenes Lately opened by Belzoni”, on pg. 582 – 584 we cite:
“Now the Brahmins are unanimous in declaring, that every Pyramid is an artificial mountain, designedly constructed as a copy of the Holy Mount Meru. This holy mountain they describe as the special abode of Iswara, who, during an universal deluge, floated in the ship Argha, upon the surface of the ocean.”
“The Hindoo theologians, though occasionally differing as to the form which they ascribe to the holy mount Meru, very generally represent it as being square, as standing with an accurate relation to the four cardinal points of the compass, and as composed of eight successively diminishing towers placed one upon the other. Such, according to Herodotus and Strabo, was the exact form and arrangement of the Tower of Babylon. But this very pyramid, raised on the banks of the Euphrates, was, according to the Hindoo theologians, the earliest montiform [in the shape of a mountain] edifice which the sons of men reared as a studious copy of Mount Meru.”
It is now plain enough, why each Egyptian pyramid, though, like every other pyramid, a copy of Mount Meru or Ararat, was yet very truly, according to their theological speculations, declared by the priesthood to be the tomb of a very ancient king of the country. By this ancient king they meant the Hero-God Osiris, and his tomb was such another as the Cretans shewed for the sepulcher of their chief Hero-God Zan, or Jupiter; but the Greeks took them literally and thence handed down to posterity, that the pyramids were literal tombs of certain literal Egyptians kings.” [All emphasis (underlined, bold words and interjections) mines]
To examine these passages and compare them with the the extensive research that has been undertaken by this author regarding this topic, I have concluded without a doubt that, based on the preponderance of the evidence compiled by this author, coupled with that which has been presented in the above, along with several other references not used or cited in this works, that Mount Meru holds some significance among many civilizations of the ancient world as the very source of their respective myths pertaining to the origins of man. The very fact that Mount Meru is described as being square in shape in some way shape or form which we will cite references forthcoming in this regard, brings to mind the beautiful Kaaba of Arabia. We will highlight the Moabite origins of the Holy City of Mecca in the broad works of this subject on Moab and the direct connection between one of the other names of Mecca, that being Mesha which is the same name as one of the early rulers of Moab and the fact that the said God of Mesha, Chemosh, was also venerated by the early Arabians as a black stone and its possibly being the same black stone that is the corner stone of the Kaaba.
To continue, Godfrey Higgins in his infamous book, Anacaylpsis, provides even more detail of this mystical mountain and its relation to several ancient myths in this regard. He would say on page 354, of said book:
“Ilavratta, Id-avratta, or Ararat, or Mount Meru of the Indians, was surrounded with seven belts of land and seven seas, and beyond them, by one much greater called the ocean. This was exactly in imitation of the earth and the seven planets…On the top of Mount Meru, called the Mount of Saba, or of the congregation of the heavenly host… Here we find the seat of God with its seven earths, emblematical of the sun and seven planets. And the Hindoo Sabh, called congregation, meaning the same as Sabaoth,“Lord God of the Sabaoth,” Lord God of the heavenly hosts, the starry host. We always end with the sun and what we call in the Bible Sabaoth, but in Hebrew it is the same as the Sanscrit zba; and generally means Lord of the planetary bodies – zba-e-smim; though, perhaps, the stars may sometimes be included by uninitiated persons. Here is the origin of the Sabæns, which has been much sought for.” (emphasis mines)
Let us examine some of these names in the above reference cited by Higgins; “Ilavratta”, “Id-avratta”, and “Ararat.” Is it that IL is related to the name El who sits on the mountain as the chief of all Gods in ancient times? Can it be that the Id of Id-avratta relates to the “Ad” people of ancient Arabia who are an ancient people that are the subject of wrath according to the Koran of Mohammed? Higgins in the above verse cites the Sabeans as the people who descend from the ancient mount. Are not the most ancient peoples of Arabia also considered Sabeans? We will go in-depth on this aspect in chapter eight however, it was worth mentioning because there was something else from Higgin’s works that caught this author’s attention in connection to the above where he states:
“…and we have just now seen, that there was an Ileyam or Ilium in India; that, in fact, Meru was Ilium. Ilavratta, or the Indian Ararat, was often written Idavratta. This is evidently mount Ida.”  [Emphasis mines]
“Col. Franklin has observed the connection between the Mythoses of the East and West. He says “The Gods are Merupa (Meropes of Homer) and signify in Sanscrit Lords of Mount Meru, the North-pole of the Hindoos, which is a circular spot, and the strong hold of the Gods: it is called Ila: or, in a derivative form, Ileyam or Ilium.””[Emphasis mines]
In this first citation from pg. 364 it speaks of Ida being one of the names of the mountains. Again, it is hard for us to simply ignore the possible, and I want to stress, possible connection between Ad and Id/Ida which this author also believes to be connected to the name Ad’ah, the said wife of Lamech in the biblical narrative (Gen. 4:19). The Hebrew suffix –ah represents the feminine aspect of the word. If you remove this feminine aspect and let it stand alone, it becomes ‘Ad’ in the singular. We find the same thing with El and Elah in the Hebrew. We will not enlarge upon this at this time but it must be pointed out for future reference and inquiry.
I want to now bring you to the word “Ilium” and “Ileyam” cited above by Higgins. It bears a striking linguistic connection to the word Illiyun mentioned in the Koran of Mohammed. The word Illiyun only appears one time in one verse of the Yusef Ali translation of the Koran of Mohammed.
“And what will explain to thee what Illiyun is?” (83:19)
In it, we find that Illiyun relates to a “supreme register”. The very fact that this word sounds similar to the Hebrew word Elyon which means “most high”, gives us plausible weight for our overall theory in regards to this chapter. We bring attestation to this point further by observing several ayats (verses) subsequent to the above cited where it goes on to say at 83:23 that:
“On thrones (of dignity) they will be able to see a view (of all things)”
Again, this author does not want to be accused of conflation so this author by using the words “probable”, “plausible”, “theory”, etc., readily admits that he cannot definitively conclude these connections in some or most cases in regards to the topic of this chapter however, how can one ignore such parallels and summarily or otherwise dismiss them? “On thrones of dignity they will be able to see a view of all things”? Does this not sound like the very description given for Šumeru? Would not one perched upon a mountain be able to see a “view of all things”? Would these individuals not be “lords” or “kings” sitting on “thrones of dignity”? In the Canaanite pantheon of Gods, do we not find El as the anthropomorphic deity sitting at the highest peak of the “sacred mountain” of the Gods? Is this not why we have the name El Elyon which translates as God Most High based solely on his position at the top of the mythical mount above all other Gods in the anthropomorphic sense? Again, this author stresses that he is no scholar but is merely a simple researcher, a compiler of sorts, but does challenge any who comes across this missive to discount even the theoretical connections that have been sewn together thus far by that thread called “Mt. Meru.”
Now one may be asking, because the name Meru is close in pronunciation to the name Moor, is there any form of corroborating evidence and/or sources/references that can at least, theoretically, bring some verity to this authors claim that Moor may be derived from Meru? This author has been accused of connecting every “m-r” word to Moor so let us delve deeper in this regard. In an 1841 works titled History of the Moors of Spain by an author named “M. Florian”, we find the most interesting account in that, as noted previously in this work, speaks to a “mythical” and ambiguous origin of the Moors that Godfrey Higgins with confidence concluded. It reads:
“The origin of the Moors, or Mauritanians, is like that of most other ancient nations, obscure, and in the information we possess concerning their history confusedly mingled with fables. The fact, however, appears to be established, that Asiatic emigrations were, from the earliest times, made into Africa. In addition to this, the historians of remote ages, speak of a certain Meleck Yafrick, king of Arabia Felix, who conducted a people called Sabæi into Libya [Libya is anciently the Northern portions of Africa], made himself master of that country, established his followers there, and gave it the name of Africa. It is from these Sabians or Sabæi that the principle Moorish tribes pretend to trace their descent. The derivation of the name Moors is also supposed, in some degree, to confirm the impression that they came originally from Asia. But, without enlarging upon these ancient statements, let it suffice to say, that nearly certain ground exists for the belief that the original Moors were Arabians. In confirmation of this impression, we find that, during every period of the existence of their race, the descendants of the primitive inhabitants of Mauritania have, like the Arabs, been divided into distinct tribes, and, like them, have pursued a wild wandering mode of existence.” [Added emphasis mines]
What more can be given insofar as parallels are concerned to convince the reader that all of these things are connected? Florian’s mention that the “The derivation of the name Moors is also supposed, in some degree, to confirm the impression that they came originally from Asia” is an obvious allusion to our subject “Meru” as we have shown by the sources above. This author will not dare chalk this up as a definitive however, how much weighty preponderance of the evidence can be given in this regard? Did not Higgins conclude that the Sabaeans were the first people descended from the sacred Mount Meru? If the Sabeans, who are also mentioned in the Koran of Mecca (2:62), are seen as the first people off of the sacred Mount Meru by the aforementioned, even as the earliest inhabitants of Arabia by some sources (click here for a reference), and that the same are noted as Hamites and Cushites, then how much more correlation do you need? Do you desire more resources in this regard? Let us look at the interpretations of one of the most controversial and critically acclaimed authors of the 19th century, Gerald Massey in the second volume of his works A Book of the Beginnings, the critically acclaimed and famed Egyptologists noted:
“In Egyptian the Ru is the horizon, as the door, gate, or mouth to the Meh, the abyss in the north. The Ruru denotes the horizon as the place of the two lions, the double horizon of the equinoctial level. The RRU” are steps. MEH-RU would thus unite the abyss below and the horizon above. It is possible that the Mount Meru with its seven steps may be the type of this MEHRU, though that is not our object at present. There is an ideograph of the two Egypts, the original of what is known as the Greek “border pattern,” which reads MERI or MERUI.”
“It is the visible sign of lower and upper, or MEH (north, the abyss) and RRU (horizon and steps), and it is feasible that the name of Temeri is the land of MEH-RU, whence Meru, and the ancient Meroé was once the capital of two Egypts under this name. The first lower and upper were north and south, but the Maori Mauru is north and west, and this is in keeping with the Meh, north, and the Ru is the horizon west. Meroë in Æthiopia was due north from the equator, but reckoning from Central Africa or from Habesh (Abyssinia) we shall find the land of the ancient MAURI(Mauritania), howsoever the district was bounded at different times, was always to the north-west of our centre, which travels from the equator down to Lower Egypt. Thus we have a “Mauri,” for the country north-west in Africa, answering to the Maori name of the north-west as Mauru. This shifts the duality of Meh-ru or Meru, from north and south to north and west, just as it was shifted when the hinder-part west was called Khept, as the place of going down instead of the north. This name for a land lying north-west of the African centre–always reckoning from the south–would deposit the name of the Muari land; MARMARICA (a duplicate form) and Marocco as the Mauri or Moors went farther north into Spain or TZEPHON.
From these and other data may be drawn the inference that the Maori people were self-name as the emigrants who came from the north-west, one name of which MAURU, Egyptian Meru, Meroë or the Meh-ru. The Mauri name is that of the later Moors, of a land under the Tropic of Cancer and north-west of the equator, as well as of Æthiopia the typical birthplace, and the name of the Moors found on the Egyptian monuments is written MAURI or MAURUI.”
There are so many things that can be broken down in the above quote by Gerald Massey besides the obvious where it says “and the name of the Moors found on the Egyptian monuments is written MAURI or MAURUI.”
To have such a theory first drawn up by this author, confirmed by another notable scholar with a theoretical assessment and statement in this regard, while matching it up to what the walls of Egypt to this author clearly relays, is paramount for this author on a personal level as such theories and conclusions are usually summarily dismissed on its face by those who will not go the extra mile in this type of research, but dismiss it, and justifiably so, based on some of the more outrages claims made by those who know that they are Moors but advance pseudohistorical theories. When it is you however that weaves together solid evidence and/or other theoretical conclusions of the same point that you yourself came up with based on hours of intense study, it is gratifying in the sense that it cannot be shown to be wrong and, even if taken wholly as theory, has to be respected by any scholar about who is about his/her work as just that, good sound theory. This author gives all praise to Allah and the highest of honors to His Holy and Divine Prophet Noble Drew Ali.
The very fact that Massey places the birthplace of these Moors in what he calls Æthiopia and the very fact that one of the names of ancient Ethiopia as coined by the Chaldeans/Babylonians is Mirukh as we have derived from early scholars and we see the same place forming name “-uhk” like with Uruk a city of ancient Chaldee/Babylonia, and the fact that Moors are called Chaldeans by Christian chroniclers, gives us enough weighty evidence to tip the scales.
Now let us look at the Egyptian glyphs in this regard in relation to the above references to “Mer”. This author has been accused of conflation and simply trying to fit a square peg in a round hole and so we will let the configurations speak to the reader for a moment. We take you back to Budge’s Egyptian dictionary:
Both of these translations come from E.A. Wallace Budge. Notice that the two glyphs above have a completely different pictorial sequence. The former connotes the name of the land while the latter denotes the name of the people themselves. This author does not profess to be a reader of the Egyptian hieroglyphics however, this author does purport to have good ol’ common sense and can see that the two sequences above do not match up and this author is left with trusting the translator (Budge and his sources) in this regard who in turn agrees with Gerald Massey that the name Moor can in fact be found in the Egyptian pyramids in Egyptian vernacular for the name of the people themselves. This author does know this about the glyphs however, that the “TA” means “land” and that the “AU” at the end denotes plurality which is represented by the three vertical lines behind the woman figure in the glyph.
This then leaves us with “MER” and when you simply weigh this with what we have shown above, it is impossible to ignore! This same Mer is rendered in the glyphs as shown in figure 1, as mer and meru, with the latter connection to the very name for the mystical mountain of Asiatic lore. The Egyptians obviously, placed the highest of importance on the pyramids which are montiform aspects of mountains. The Cushites did the same thing in Cush or the land we call Nubia today. If the name of Egypt is also “Mera” (Pa-Ta-Mera; “the land of Mera” Budge, pg. 315) then the people would undoubtedly, still be called by the demonym Mer, or Mera, as the second glyph in the above sequence shows. In this, the author believes that he has, like Massey, located the name Moor in the Egyptian hieroglyphs and opens up, as usual, for any sound scholastic or academic rebuttals.
We cannot ignore any of the above and for this author, it gives confirmation that the name “Moor” is the most ancient appellation of the race of people who have for themselves in these days and times, accepted a misnomer Negro and Black which has been attached to our people as a slave brand since the times of slaver.
So how then does all of this relate to the name Cush or the people called Cushites? This author and researcher yet proposes another bold theory that it is simply hard for any astute student of sequential information to ignore.
For this, we bring you back to the book Har-Moad where the authors are giving the reader two different breakdowns on this name Meropes which is the self-same is Mirukh and Meru and Meroe as this author has highlighted in past works and will undoubtedly highlight in chapter eight. On pg. 405 we read:
“Merops. 1. King of the Island of Cos, husband of the nymph Ethemea, and father of Eumelus. His wife was killed by Diana because she had neglected to worship that goddess. Merops, in order to rejoin his wife, wished to make away with himself, but Juno changed into an Eagle, whom she placed among the starts.
2. King of the Æthiopians, by whose wife, Clymene, Helious, became the father of Phaëthon.
Thus Merops is to be identified with the constellation of the Eagle, or Aquila. But to the above extract should be added the following: Meropes, an ancient name of the inhabitants of the island of Cos, from an early king, Merops (Lidd. and Scott, Gr. Lex., sub ). It remains now to show that the name Merops is only another form of the word Meru, applied to the first men issuing from the sacred mount, that is to say, the Meropes.”
The above is exceedingly revealing in so many regards. How many of us learned about Merops, the king of “Æthiopia” in the mandatory Greek mythology lessons that we studied in school or, for the most part, in any of our Afrocentric studies? This eagle Aquila, is this the same eagle that we find in Roman-American symbolism stemming from a symbol of the original Romans who were the Moors? Can we conclude that what is known as the mythical coat of arms of the Ethiopians which connects to the Moors of Europe and the true identity of Prophet Jesus himself is the self-same as the double headed eagle adopted into Freemasonry and other European nations? This author does without doubt or contradiction!
This name Merops and Meropes, we find again connected with the name Meru which according to the Babylonians, is the area called by them “Mirukh” which is in fact the land named Cush whom Europeans have given the name Ethiopia to.
Well what about this island called “Cos” that was cited in the above? Is Cos somehow related to Cush? Again, we must reference these early sources because there is simply no known etymology to the word Cush and if you leave it up to those people who re-wrote the history that we know today as the Torah or the Old Testament, Cush just simply means “black” which is completely false according to their own language. Now, let us review page 406 of the book Har-Moad where it says:
“…that the same name Merops is connected with that of Æthiopia, a country particularly mentioned by Moses in his geographical description of Eden, this being of course the Asiatic and not the African Æthiopia. Finally, the name Cos given to the island ruled by Merops can be no other than Cush, by which the Cushite race was so generally known. Merops is, then, only another name of the first man, applied to the primeval abode of humanity under the form Meru, like Asgard from Askur, among the Scandinavians, and As-kar, “propitious summit,” among the inhabitants of the Euphrates valley.” [emphasis mines]
To reiterate, the authors of the book Har-Moad have concluded that Cush is Cos and that this land of Cos (Cush) was called Meropes which we have shown earlier in this treatise, is the same exact appellation as Meru, and that the Cushites (today called black people) represent the first people of the world which, ethnically, is a known genetic fact and, those of you familiar with my previous works, now see why this author strongly feels that the word Moor means “original man”. The Greeks concluded that Meropes was not only the first man of the world, but also a king of ancient Ethiopia which is historically Cush. Obviously, we cannot cite one source and give it to you as a definitive; the fact of the matter is that it is largely theoretical and still, there has never been found the etymology of the name Cush and so how can we dismiss the above in any instance?
Let us bring the reader to another source in this regard. We find in another early works called “The American antiquarian and oriental journal, Volume 34 edited by Stephen Denison Peet, J. O. Kinnaman (1912) on page thirteen where it states:
“Cush or Kush is written Cus or Cos. As sh is really equal to s plus the consonant y sound, the Greeks tried to produce the sh before vowel endings by inserting i (equal to y) after s, as in Casiotis, that is Cash-ot or Kush-at, and Masius, that is Mash (Mountains north of Mesopotamia).”
Another source and several other early sources (which will be shown in the larger works) agree that this Cos is in fact Cush of ancient fame and the fact that Prophet Noble Drew Ali informs us that it was the Cushites who first inhabited Africa and that they came from the land of Canaan (Ch. 47. v. 2), thus showing the bloodline link that these names like Moor, Cushite, Ham, Canaan, Sabean, Arab, etc., are but synonymous renderings, is compelling. Dunjee Houston noted something profound in her great book as well. She stated that:
“We know by the records that Amenophis (Memnon), seized the whole coast of Arabia, Libya and Ethiopia. In the Iranian histories he had extended his conquests to far Bactrina. Amenophis subdued the Scythic nations in the Caucasus. He marched into Colchis which was Ethiopian(Her. II, 104) and marched as far as the Don. These were but old Cushite dominions.” – pg. 112
“Let us examine ancient testimony to see if we can find the real origin of these Cassites. It was a race name of the original Chaldeans. Ezra V., 12, links the name Chaldean with the name Casdim. Daniel IX, 1, says that when the Babylonian army besieged Jerusalem it was the army of the Chaldee or Casdim. Taylor thought the Babylonians and the Casdim the same people. The races moved eastward from Kedem. Bryant in his Ancient Mythology, Vol. III, p. 226, fixes Kedem in the Caucasus. This more and more seems to be the center from which the three races emigrated, or near it. Let us look into the Caucasus and see if we can find the name Casdim. There today we find lingering remnants of the Iberians (ancient Cushites of Europe). Wilford in the Asiatic Researches, Vol. VI, p. 455, says that Ptolemy called the most ancient race of the Caucasus, Cassia or Chasas. They occupied this range from its eastern limits on the Euxine Sea to the confines of Persia. They are often mentioned in the sacred books of the Hindu and their descendants still inhabiting these regions are called Cassia to this day. One Cassite king of Babylon married an Assyrian princess. Their reign came to an end about 1207 B. C.
To what race did be Casdim belong? Sanchoniathon said that their great ancestor was Chasa or Chasya who lived before the Hood and gave his name to the mountains that he seized upon. Some of the Greek legends centered about the Caucasus. This name Caucasus or Coh-Cas extended from India to the Mediterranean. The borders of Persia were inhabited by the Cassaei, there was a Mount Cassius on the border of Egypt and another in Syria. The titles of Cassius and Cassiopaeus are nearly synonymous with Jupiter, the god of Rome.”
She is clearly transmitting that the original peoples of the Caucasus were in fact Cushites and that the very name Caucasus is nothing more than a variant rendering of the name Cush which matches up to the last source cited in that regard.
To further add on more connections to this chapter of which will be chronologically sequenced in the book, we find that according to Samuel Bochart, a French Protestant biblical scholar whose works were relied on heavily by early biblical scholars, stated that the Colchis are in fact the Casluhim son of Mizraim (Genesis 10:14; 1 Chronicles 1:12), which, according to early Islamic historical records, represents a son of Berber. Ibn Khaldun (1332-1406) gives one of the only historical references of Berber being used eponymously. He would give the reason that became widely accepted as to why the Berbers were “black” complexioned. In this critical view, it matches up with what Bochart says concerning Casluhim which is nothing more than a branch of the ancient Moors of Egypt (Mauritani). He writes :
“Ham, having become black because of a curse pronounced against him by his father, fled to the Maghrib to hide in shame…. Berber, son of Kesloudjim [Casluhim], one of his descendants, left numerous posterity in the Maghrib” 
The Maghrib simply means “furthermost west” and to some, represents the whole of Northwest and Southwest Africa and to others, restrictively places Maghrib as Northwest Africa alone. These Colchis (sons of Egypt, also Berbers) are said to be the educators of the Greeks and would undoubtedly give us an understanding as to how the Greeks form the basis of their mythoi like we have today in Homer’s Iliad. The very name Iliad can be looked at under the same microscope that this author has given in the above. The name Ili- is a Canaanite (Semetic) variation for God and –ad, from this author’s perspective, just appears to line up with the ancient Arabian people of Ad and the mystical mountain called Ida. This is of course, this authors opinion and pure speculation but it is hard to refrain from drawing such a hard conclusion when you have so many parallels which tend to attach themselves like magnets to each other linguistically and by heredity from civilization to civilization. What of the Greek “Olympus” which is the famed mountain in their mythos? Does the “Ol” that forms the beginning of the word Olympus reference Il, or Al, or El? For where can the etymology of this name be found? The online etymological dictionary says for Olympus:
“high mountain in Thessaly, abode of the gods, from Greek Olympos, of unknown origin. The name was given to several mountains, each seemingly the highest in its district.”
Is it so far-fetched then, where etymologists cannot trace its source, for this author or any in that regard, to offer up a reasonable hypothesis that clearly relates in name to the other world mountains of mythical fame having for its roots El, Al, or Il who, as is noted in one of the oldest systems in the world (Canaanite) which also represents the most high of all Gods and the very name of God himself? El, also transliterated as Il (pronounced ‘eel’), or Al, or Ala (which gives us Allah today) stands as the most high in rank in its mythical perspective, sits on the seat of the top of the mountain to accentuate his rank. And the fact that the Moorish American Moslems of today annex the El on their given names as a tribal designation which in actuality makes it a theophoric name (connecting the name of a God to your name), coupled with the fact that these Moslems know that they are Moors, couple that with Florian’s allusion based on an Asiatic appellation which we have clearly shown to be Meru or more specifically, Mount Meru to which, Gerald Massey so to concluded, simply cannot be ignored.
Mount Moriah of the Biblical scriptures which in Arabic is Marwah (مروة) which is the same place where Solomon began to build the house of the lord at Jerusalem (2 Chronicles 3:1) adds weight to the above. The very fact that Mt. Sion to which we know of today as Zion is only another name for Mount Hermon is equally important. Why? Because Hermon simply means “nose of mountain” according to Smith’s Bible Dictionary. Mt. Hermon is called Jabal al-Shaykh by the Arabic speakers which translates as “Mountain of the Chief” and here, in this translation alone, we find our parallel illumining itself once again. If Mt. Hermon simply means nose of the mountain and Sion simply means, high, or elevated, then again, we are speaking to the peak of the mountain which is by all intents and purposes, the same as noted earlier of Šu-meru and the very epithets connected with it.
What about the actual mountain which borders Tanzania and Kenya called Mount Meru? How about the people of Bantu origin that call themselves by their most ancient appellation of Meru (pronounced Meh-roo-way) who speak a language called Kimeru which is also called “Mer”? Is this just happenstance or coincidence? These Meru posit a tradition similar to the biblical accounts of Joshua driving out the people of ancient Canaan. Arabia, according to Moorish Science Temple of America doctrine, is in fact a part of ancient Canaan land. These African Meru, as some scholars have asserted, based on the oral traditions of the Meru people, came from ancient Yemen after being driven out of their homeland by the “red man”. Their language, although a Bantu dialect, has also been classified as “Cushitic in origin.”
We will expand these accounts in the book dedicated to this subject however, we could not leave the reader of this compelling information without something tangible in regards to this subject that we can point to today and tie that into what appears to be an ever pervasive myth that has so many ancient (and some modern) cultural parallels. To ignore these parallels, we truly cut ourselves off from aspects of our history that has never been settled; but does however, appear to have been passed from generation to generation, culture to culture, in the form of a myth based on this mythical mountain.
When this book is published, every aspect of this mythical mountain will be covered and hidden and unknown aspects uncovered, particularly in this first chapter detailing the paradisaical source of Man himself on this physical earth. We will highlight the Atlantis mythoi in this regard as well along with other sources that places a giant island here (in the west) near the Americas called Meropes and the fact that some of the peoples of the Americas were actually called “Meropes” will make these finds all the more interesting. This book is not based upon this mythical mountain, this one chapter is. This book is however, based upon never before put together information about the origins of the Moors who are the Moabites and to give some good sound etymological theories as well where professional etymologists have not been able to give us answers.
Peace and Love
Sheik Way-El, Grand Sheik and Divine Minister
Moorish Science Temple of America
Subordinate Temple Atlantis
 Har-Moad: or the mountain of the assembly : a series of archeological studies chiefly from the standpoint of the cuneiform inscriptions, pg. vii, By Orlando Dana Miller, Stephen Munson Whipple (1891)
 Wonderful Ethiopians of the Ancient Cushite Empire (1926) By Druscilla Dunjee Houston, pg. 29
 Paradise Found, (1885)by William F. Warren, pg. 228-229
 Ibid, pg. 236
 Francis Wilford, Asiatic Researches, vol. viii., p. 289
 Holman Bible Dictionary 1991
 Anacalypsis an Attempt to Draw Aside the Veil of the Saitic Isis, Volume 1 (1836) By Godfrey Higgins, pg. 354
 Sura 6-8, Sura 50-60, Sura 123 – 140
 Higgins, pg. 364
 Ibid, pg. 363
 History of the Moors of Spain By Florian (1840)
 “A Book of the Beginnings – Volume 2” (republished 2007) pg. 590
 “Wonderful Ethiopians of the Ancient Cushite Empire” Druscilla Dunjee Houston, pg. 127
 An Egyptian Hieroglyphic Dictionary Vol II: With an Index of English Words, King List, and Geographical List with Indexes, List of Hieroglyphic Characters, Coptic and Semitic Alphabets, PG 815 By E. A. Wallis Budge, the second glyph comes from a book of the same name Vol. I, pg. 1050
 Light and truth: collected from the Bible and ancient and modern history, containing the universal history of the colored and the Indian race, from the creation of the world to the present time (1844) By Robert Benjamin Lewis, pg. 340
 SIGILLUM SECRETUM (Secret Seal) On the image of the Blackamoor in European Heraldry (a preliminary proposal for an iconographical study) by Mario de Valdes y Cocom http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/secret/famous/ssecretum1.html
 “Wonderful Ethiopians of the Ancient Cushite Empire” Druscilla Dunjee Houston, pg. 127
 Wonderful Ethiopians of the Ancient Cushite Empire by Druscilla Dunjee Houston (1926) pg. 112
 Ibid, pp. 174-175
 Geographia sacra: seu Phaleg et Chanaan (1707) iv. 31
 “What happened to the ancient Libyans? Chasing sources across the Sahara from Herodotus to Ibn Khaldun,” Journal of World History 14:4 (2003), By Richard Smith, pg. 482
 The Meru of Kenya http://orvillejenkins.com/profiles/meru.html