Wednesday, December 31, 2025

Why Charles Martel did not inherit the “hammer” of Judas Maccabeus

 

 


 

by

 

Damien F. Mackey

 

 

 

 

“Ninth-century chroniclers, who interpreted the outcome of the battle

as divine judgment in his favour, gave Charles the nickname Martellus 

(“The Hammer”), possibly recalling Judas Maccabeus (“The Hammerer”)

of Maccabean revolt”.

 

Wikispeedia

 

 

 

 

Introduction

 

Just as he was surrounded by adversity on all sides, according to what has been recounted of his exploits, so does the Frankish king, Charles Martel, need to face most rigorous scrutiny from history, chronology and archaeology.

 

He (c. 688-741 AD) is supposed to have lived during that most dubious of centuries, the C7th AD (and on into the C8th): 

   

Scrutinising the C7th AD for its conundrums and anachronisms

 

(4) Scrutinising the C7th AD for its conundrums and anachronisms

 

It is in that century, presumably, that we encounter such historical impossibilities and duplicates as, for instance, the Prophet Mohammed:

 

Biography of the Prophet Mohammed (Muhammad) Seriously Mangles History

 

(4) Biography of the Prophet Mohammed (Muhammad) Seriously Mangles History

 

and a ‘new’ Nehemiah:

 

Supposedly two officials ‘Nehemiah’ occupying BC time and AD time

 

(4) Supposedly two officials 'Nehemiah' occupying BC time and AD time

 

and that impossibly marvellous Byzantine emperor, that composite of all composites, Heraclius:

 

Something almost miraculous about our emperor Heraclius

 

(4) Something almost miraculous about our emperor Heraclius

 

Moreover, Charles Martel is considered to have given rise to the Carolingian dynasty, to Pepin (his son) and Charlemagne (his grandson), C8th AD, another era that is replete with problems. Charlemagne, for instance, appears to have been a breathtaking composite along lines similar to the emperor Heraclius. And there are enormous archaeological difficulties associated with him as well.

On these, see e.g.my article:

 

Solomon and Charlemagne

 

(4) Solomon and Charlemagne

 

which article does not, however, exhaust all of the problems as we are going to find.

 

To the C7th AD, then, have been attributed some marvellously colourful characters, and Charles Martel, so admired by Catholics, for instance, does not disappoint in this regard.

 

“The hammer” of God

 

“Other views link the name [Maccabee] with a root that means “to extinguish”,

since the Maccabees extinguished the Greek persecution, or with makkav,

“a hammer”; Judah, like Charles Martel, was the hammer of his enemies”.

 

OzTorah

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judas_Maccabeus

 

In the early days of the rebellion, Judah received a surname Maccabee. Several explanations have been put forward for this surname. One suggestion is that the name derives from the Aramaic maqqaba (“makebet” in modern Hebrew), “hammer” or “sledgehammer” (cf. the cognomen of Charles Martel, the 8th century Frankish leader), in recognition of his ferocity in battle. Others believe it is in reference to his weapon of choice.

 

It is also possible that the name Maccabee is an acronym for the Torah verse Mi kamokha ba’elim Adonai, “Who among the gods is like you, O Adonai?”, his battle-cry to motivate troops. (Exodus 15:11). Rabbi Moshe Schreiber writes that it is an acronym for his father’s name Mattityahu Kohen Ben Yochanan. Some scholars maintain that the name is a shortened form of the Hebrew maqqab-ya ¯hû (from na ¯qab, ‘‘to mark, to designate’’), meaning ‘‘the one designated by Yahweh.’ ….

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Martel

“The victory at the battle near Poitiers and Tours would later earn Charles the cognomen “Martellus” (L., and so “Martel”, Fr.: “the hammer”) from 9th century chroniclers who, in the view of Pierre Riche, “seem to have been… recalling Judas Maccabaeus, ‘the Hammerer,'” of 1 Maccabees, “whom God had similarly blessed with victory” ….”

….

Twelve years later, when Charles had thrice rescued Gaul from Umayyad invasions, Antonio Santosuosso noted when he destroyed an Umayyad army sent to reinforce the invasion forces of the 735 campaigns, “Charles Martel again came to the rescue.” ….

 

Mackey’s comment: Make a note of Umayyad, here, which will sound the death knell for any hope of historicity for Charles Martel.

 

https://www.cs.mcgill.ca/~rwest/wikispeedia/wpcd/wp/b/Battle_of_Tours.htm

The Battle of Tours ( October 10, 732), often called Battle of Poitiers and also called in Arabic بلاط الشهداء (Balâ al-Shuhadâ’) The Court of Martyrs was fought near the city of Tours, close to the border between the Frankish realm and the independent region of Aquitaine. The battle pitted Frankish and Burgundian forces under Austrasian Mayor of the Palace Charles Martel against an army of the Umayyad Caliphate led by ‘Abd-al-Ramān al-Ghāfiqī, Governor-general of al-Andalus. The Franks were victorious, ‘Abd-al-Ramān was killed, and Martel subsequently extended his authority in the south. Ninth-century chroniclers, who interpreted the outcome of the battle as divine judgment in his favour, gave Charles the nickname Martellus (“The Hammer”), possibly recalling Judas Maccabeus (“The Hammerer”) of Maccabean revolt.

 

Details of the battle, including its exact location and the exact number of combatants, cannot be determined from accounts that have survived.

 

As later chroniclers increasingly came to praise Charles Martel as the champion of Christianity, pre-20th century historians began to characterize this battle as being the decisive turning point in the struggle against Islam. “Most of the 18th and 19th century historians, like Gibbon, saw Poitiers (Tours), as a landmark battle that marked the high tide of the Muslim advance into Europe.” Leopold Von Ranke felt that “Poitiers was the turning point of one of the most important epochs in the history of the world.”

While modern historians are divided as to whether or not the victory was responsible — as Gibbon and his generation of historians claimed — for saving Christianity and halting the conquest of Europe by Islam, the battle helped lay the foundations for the Carolingian Empire, and Frankish domination of Europe for the next century. “The establishment of Frankish power in western Europe shaped that continent’s destiny and the Battle of Tours confirmed that power.”

 

https://mosaicmagazine.com/observation/2017/12/judah-the-maccabee-judah-the-mace-man/

In a 2011 article on the subject, Mitchell First argues persuasively, based on an analysis of ancient Greek and Latin orthography, that the kuf spelling is the older one.

He also agrees with the now commonly accepted theory, first put forth by the American Bible scholar Samuel Ives Curtiss, Jr. in 1876, that makkabi derives from Hebrew makevet or its Aramaic cognate makava, a hammer or mallet. First writes:

 

As to why Judah was called by this name, one view is that the name alludes to his physical strength or military prowess. But a makevet/makava is not a military weapon; it is a worker’s tool. Therefore, it has been suggested alternatively that the name reflects that Judah’s head or body in some way had the physical appearance of a hammer. 

 

Interestingly, the Mishnah at B’khorot 7:1 lists one of the categories of disqualified priests as ha-makavan [“the hammerhead”], and the term is explained in the Talmud as meaning one whose head resembles a makava. Naming men according to physical characteristics was common in the ancient world.

 

The derivation of makkabi from makevet or makava certainly makes better sense than any of the contending explanations.

What I would take issue with is the assertion made by First and others before him that since a hammer “is not a military weapon,” Judah Maccabee must have been likened to one because of his physical appearance, or else because of his physical power or strength of character.

 

The fact of the matter is that in both ancient and medieval times, hammers were military weapons. First himself mentions the French warrior Charles Martel, “Charles the Hammer,” the grandfather of Charlemagne, best known for stemming the Muslim advance into Europe at the Battle of Tours in 734. While this epithet, too, may have referred only to Charles’s prowess as a commander, the martel de fer or “iron hammer” was a feature of medieval warfare. Typically, it was mace-like or club-like at one end and pointed like a pickax at the other, and it was most commonly wielded by mounted cavalry to smash the armor of enemy soldiers.

 

http://aramaicherald.blogspot.com/2010/11/hammer-of-god_17.html

…. Two individuals in history have been known as “The Hammer of God”: Judah Maccabee and Charles Martel. The title “Maccabee” was given to Judah the son of Mattityahu Bar Hashmonay. (Judas Maccabeus is another way of saying Judah Maccabee.)

….

Judah Maccabee fought against the tyrannical Seleucid Greeks beginning in the year 167 BC [sic].

 

Centuries later, after defeating a massive Moslem army in central France, Charles the son of Pepin was called “Martel,” meaning “The Hammer” in Latin. Charles the Hammer beat back an invasion of Europe by the Muslim Empire in October 732 AD. Charles Martel defeated the Moslems at the Battle of Tours (also known as the Battle of Poitiers). ….

 

The acute Umayyad Problem

 

Archaeology associated with the so-called Umayyad caliphate of Islam, but actually dating closer to the time of Jesus Christ, turns out to be utterly devastating for the historicity of Mohammed and the so-called caliphates (e.g. Rashidun and Umayyad):

 

Umayyads as Nabataean Arabs

 

(5) Umayyads as Nabataean Arabs

 

This fundamental level evidence also kills stone dead any hope that Charles Martel, alleged to have fought the Umayyads, could have been a genuine historical person.

 

Later, the Abbasid caliphate, associated with Charlemagne – through that fictious ‘Arabian Nights’ character, Harun al-Raschid – will come crashing down as well, along with its supposed capital city of Baghdad:

 

Original Baghdad was Jerusalem

 

(5) Original Baghdad was Jerusalem

 

 

Related article:

 

Maccabeans and Crusaders, Seleucids and Saltukids (Seljuks)

 

(5) Maccabeans and Crusaders Seleucids and Saltukids Seljuks

 

 

Friday, December 12, 2025

Egyptian and Mexican linguistic correspondences

 



More Egyptian and Mexican linguistic correspondences

from Charles W. Johnson

 

 

A similar pattern was noted in previous Earth/matrix studies

regarding Nahuatl, where the omission of the letter “L” in Nahuatl

produced word roots in ancient Kemi hieroglyphs.”.

 

Charles William Johnson

 

 

 

 

Ancient Egyptian and Purépecha eBook : Charles William Johnson: Amazon.com.au: Kindle Store

 

Ancient Egyptian and Purépecha 

 

by Charles William Johnson (Author)  Format: Kindle Edition

 


 

The author examines the linguistic correspondence between the ancient Egyptian hieroglyphs and the language generally known as Purépecha of Mexico. The origins of the Purépecha language and its people are not known by scholars. Some students attribute the origins of the Purépecha to the people of ancient Peru. In this comparative linguistic study, there exist numerous linguistic correspondences between the phonemes and morphemes of the Purépecha language with the ancient Egyptian hieroglyphs.

 

Due to the extent of the cited linguistic correspondences Charles William Johnson (www.earthmatrix.com) suggests that some kind of contact possibly existed between the two referenced cultures prior to their known history. It is shown that the coincidence of correspondences concern words in Purépecha who initial phoneme is dropped and then Kemi word words appear. Linguistic correspondence, then, is based in this case on discernible patterns of word constructs.

 

A similar pattern was noted in previous Earth/matrix studies regarding Nahuatl, where the omission of the letter “L” in Nahuatl produced word roots in ancient Kemi hieroglyphs.

 

If the patterns of linguistic comparisons illustrated in this study are reflexive of contact between these two ancient peoples, then the historical record itself must be reconsidered.

 

 

Tuesday, December 2, 2025

Rachel Campos-Duffy: “Reclaim our culture”

Fox News contributor Rachel Campos-Duffy (Image: Screengrab via ABC News / The View / YouTube)© provided by AlterNet “It’s always been about communism,” Campos-Duffy insisted. A Fox News host is urging viewers to defend America’s “western Christian culture” and to think “communism” whenever they hear about feminism or secularism. Rachel Campos-Duffy, a “Fox & Friends Weekend” co-host, told viewers on Monday, “I think it’s really up to us to reclaim our culture.” “We can sit and complain about it, but when we give in to those atheist groups that keep suing, we should come right back — this is our culture,” she said. “I’m not going to let, you know, pro-Palestinian or whatever they’re putting forward — these are all fronts for, you know, whenever you see any of these groups, just think feminism, secularism, just think communism. This is what they’re really about.” “It’s always been about communism,” Campos-Duffy insisted. “Making the state the center, removing the power of religion and family from our culture. It’s up to us to make sure that our culture remains what it is, which is a Western Christian culture with a beautiful history that we have in this country, and that we have to defend these things every single day, especially with our children.” Campos-Duffy has a history of targeting feminism. “Feminists like Hillary Clinton have robbed women of so much over the years, of minimizing the importance of what our purpose as mothers and as wives, and, I think, and really demeaning it and saying that it’s not the most important,” she said in September. “Always remember that feminism has never been about women. It’s always been about ABORTION and COMMUNISM,” she wrote in 2023.

Jesus according to Josephus

“[A] gripping read and triumph of careful philology that will change views of the importance and reliability of this long-debated passage. It certainly changed mine”. —Jack Tannous, Associate Professor of History and Hellenic Studies at Princeton University Home - Josephus & Jesus Josephus & Jesus. New Evidence for the One Called Christ …. This book brings to light an extraordinary connection between Jesus of Nazareth and the Jewish historian Josephus. Writing in 93/94 CE, Josephus composed an account of Jesus known as the Testimonium Flavianum. Despite this being the oldest description of Jesus by a non-Christian, scholars have long doubted its authenticity due to the alleged pro-Christian claims it contains. The present book, however, authenticates Josephus’s authorship of the Testimonium Flavianum and then reveals a startling observation: Josephus was directly familiar with those who put Jesus on trial. Consequently, Josephus would have had access to highly reliable information about the man from Nazareth. The book concludes by describing what Josephus tells us about the Jesus of history, his miracles, and his resurrection. —T. C. Schmidt (PhD, Yale University) Visiting Fellow, Princeton University, James Madison Program (2025-2026) Associate Professor, Fairfield University What Scholars Are Saying ________________________________________ An astonishingly new intervention into what had seemed to be a settled consensus…[an] erudite study — Annette Yoshiko Reed, Professor of Divinity and Professor of New Testament and Early Christianity, Harvard Divinity School An extraordinary scholarly achievement… impressive philological acumen — Tobias Hägerland, Senior Lecturer at the University of Gothenburg, Sweden “[A] gripping read and triumph of careful philology that will change views of the importance and reliability of this long-debated passage. It certainly changed mine. —Jack Tannous, Associate Professor of History and Hellenic Studies at Princeton University Josephus and Jesus: New Evidence for the One Called Christ T C Schmidt Published: 5 May 2025 Abstract This book brings to light an extraordinary connection between Jesus of Nazareth and the Jewish historian Josephus. Writing in 93/4 ce, Josephus composed an account of Jesus known as the Testimonium Flavianum. Despite this being the oldest description of Jesus written by a non-Christian, scholars have long doubted its authenticity due to the alleged pro-Christian claims it contains. The present book, however, authenticates Josephus’ authorship and then reveals a startling discovery. First, the opening chapters demonstrate that ancient Christians read the Testimonium Flavianum quite differently from modern scholars, considering it to be basically mundane or even vaguely negative, and hence far from the pro-Christian rendering that most scholars have interpreted it to be. This suggests that the Testimonium Flavianum was indeed written by a non-Christian. The book then employs stylometric analysis to demonstrate that the Testimonium Flavianum closely matches Josephus’ style. The Testimonium Flavianum appears, therefore, to be genuinely authored by Josephus. The final chapters explore Josephus’ sources of information about Jesus, revealing a remarkable discovery: Josephus was directly familiar with those who attended the trials of Jesus’ apostles and even those who attended the trial of Jesus himself. The book concludes by describing what Josephus tells us about the Jesus of history, particularly regarding how the stories of Jesus’ miracles and his resurrection developed.