The Jew a Negro: Being a Study of the Jewish Ancestry from an Impartial Standpoint (1910) Kindle Edition

Complete rubbish that isn't worth wiping my bum with the pages if it were printed on paper at some point in the past. Insulting considering most people who buy this book already know the real Jews are modern day "negroes" who've had their language, traditions, lifestyles, land stolen from them. You can tell how antiquated and shallow this author's research is based solely on the premise that he is insinuating that negroes are Hamites, which we are not! WE ARE SHEMITES! The proverbial jig is up and their is no turning back now.

This Caucasian author who makes the daring assertion that “The Jew (is) A Negro” is a product of his day (1872-1956), and his “impartial standpoint” from which he claims to present his study of Jewish ancestry, is tainted by Darwinism (evolution) and scientific (air/space) schools of thought that dominated his time. It’s a scholarly effort which cites sources but sadly lacks any references/citations in APA format. He clearly make the point that the early (biblical) Jews (and most all Biblical peoples) were Negros. However, he contends that the modern Negros today “with the unintellectual, slightly animal expression” (p.76) have no relationship to the biblical Jews but rather he asserts that Caucasian Jews are descendants of these Jewish Negroes. This evolution, from Negro to Caucasian, he proposes, is caused by some specific things which I will list. 1. a cosmic “deluge” which shifted the planet’s orbit “placing us at a greater distance from the sun’s occasion…decreasing in the heat (p.10-11), hence arguing that skin lightens/whitens due to less intense sun. 2. The prolific intermarrying and cross breeding which the biblical Negro Jews were historically known for (p, 20, 22-47). Though. he makes a clear case that most of other biblical nations (such as the Egyptians, Canaanites, philistines, etc.) which they bred with were Black people as well. 3. Culture. He quotes a “great” anthropologist who attests that, “Esthetic development tends to whiten the skin. Culture (code for superior intellect) would therefore tend to produce a blond race, while vigor (code for physicality) on the other hand, would tend to produce a brunette race” (p. 76). He says that the (white) Jew’s “sharp practice of mental erudition” causes one to consider, “is it any wonder that the modern Negro is blacker than his white brother, the Jew?” (p. 76) 4. Migration. The Jewish Negros were more migratory than other Negros. Hence more exposure to lands of “less tropical zones, they in time lost some of their tawniness and grew more and more into the appearance of the white man” Overall, he argues that the black jew-man evolve to white jew-man (evolution limited only to Jews not other humans and evolution of Jews expedited within mere thousands of years not millions as evolutionists theorize)The author does present the relevant fact and sources that the biblical Jews are Negros but he resorts to theories as to how they became White Caucasians because as a white American of his time, he cannot reconcile that modern Negros are the same people of the same ancestry as those in the Bible (though, interestingly, he presented sources to show that the negro-featured Mexicans, Central Americans (Toltecs) and Eskimos are of descendants of the “lost” tribes of Israel (p.24).The author took a departure from his source-citing style in the final chapter “Was Christ a Jew?”. Here the author makes a plethora of religious utterances to build a case for the divinity of Christ which he uses as a springboard to assert that, as such a unique man, “Christ held no physical relations to any races, and therefore was not of the Jews”. As the son of God, “we cannot fail to observe that he had none of the Jewish traits of physical appearance” (P.69). in other words, though his study showed that the Jews are Negro, he couldn't bring himself to categorize Christ as Negro and since the Caucasian Jews were not evolved from black to white as yet, he could not argue that Christ was Caucasian either. Therefore, he concludes that Christ was of "no race". He cites other sources who gave their opinions as to Christ's appearance none of which dare to refer to Christ as a Negro; "brunette like the Jews in general" (p.69) was a close to a Negro Jew the reader would get.I think the author believed that his study was 'impartial' because it was a daring task to present studies proving that the Jews of the bible like Abraham (p. 36), Moses (p. 37), and Joseph (p. 38)are really Negros. Yet, in the end it's hard to respect his work because it was riddled with contradictions as he tries to reconcile how they can be a different race today and to create a balance between fact and theory, he serious study comes off as something which a modern reader of today can ridicule. It would have been better if he had stayed the course and continued to follow the trail of history of the Negro than to resort to cosmic and evolution theories. He talks of proselytes and converts, but didn't bother to consider whether the Caucasian was a Jew by conversion. It’s worth purchasing because of the sources he cites to prove the Negro is a Jew, but the reader must realize that absolutely no author approaches a study to present a subject from an “impartial standpoint”, least of all not one of a study of Jewish Ancestry.

If the Bible said, that Jesus had hair of sheep wool and feet of bronze what color is he? Not blue eyes!

This book is just an opinion (an impartial point of view) and -it makes no ssense. It is definitely not what I thought it would be. I am very disappointed.

Lot's of MEAT in this book.

Loaded with enlightening information

Keeping on studying

Very informative book on tge lives that were stolen away from the original people of tge earth.

Amazing read fast speedy delivery 🚚 a grate book 📚 I would recommend this monologue of history to anybody