Richard Stanley

Administrator
Maybe so, but we'd need more evidence.

I've been looking at Bushby's treatment of the Essenes and the claim that Jesus and Judas were both raised in the imperial palace in Rome and then later became wards of the Essenes. This seems to turn everything upside down, unless of course, we don't have an accurate picture of whom was up to what. And thus, such as 'controlled opposition' is at play here as well.

Bushby provides accounts that the Essenes were known by various names, such as the Ebionites, the Therapeutes and the ... Men of Yesu. The latter attributed to Epiphanius on pg. 53. They are accorded as having widespread communities, and many have drawn linkages from them to the later Templars and Freemasonry. But as well, they are also accorded links back in time to Egypt, Chaldea, and even India. Robert Feather, in his Copper Scroll, has linked them strongly to Amarna, and I then have to wonder if these are also the same as Amenhotep III's Yehud priests. And then these 'Yesu' equates to Gesu, the Jesuits? Yehud relating to Yehudia > Judah > Judas; Yeshua > Jesus; Yesu > Jesu > Gesu ... Similar names and behaviors.

The Essenes also have a foundational reputation of association with the Maccabee/Hasmoneans, whom actually bridge from Egyptian affinities to Greco-Roman (sorry Judophiles). Moses Hadas, in his Hellenistic Culture, explained why the 'Jewish' Maccabees were so inclined, as well as why we should consider the ethnic relationship to the Spartans (claimed in the famous letter in 1 Maccabees) to be true. With the Spartans, let's remember typologically that Castor, Pollux, and Helen were of Spartan descent, their mortal father essentially cuckolded by Zeus.
 

Seeker

Active Member
the claim that Jesus and Judas were both raised in the imperial palace in Rome
This might be reconciled with Ellis, as if Jesus were really the secret son of Pantera (Ptolemy) his father, paternal grandparents, maternal grandmother, and possibly his mother (since her mother had been there) spent time in the Imperial household, so it would be following tradition to send Jesus and Judas there.
 

Richard Stanley

Administrator
Well, yes, this is the exact same as raising the secret daughter of Cleo 7 and her known children by Augustus, before he distributed them variously. So, the scenarios are both consistent.
 

Richard Stanley

Administrator
Just finished the following new MythVision discussion with Atwill and Jacob Berman. They discussed the problem of dating, and thus that we might / should suspect all the dating and reality of the NT dating. This was done in the general context of trashing any level of historicity, which is fine with me, as long as we're only talking about Jesus of Nazareth.

Ironically, in his works, Berman apparently deals with Josephus's Izates of Adiabene and a king Bezios (of Edessa?), but the discussion seems focused on denying even that level of consideration. As with that all of the dating is suspect, Ellis clearly demonstrates that Adiabene is a complete distractionary confabulation by Josephus (or whoever he is) to draw attention away from Edessa, of which there are coins (that resolve to those naughty 'locusts'). And of which if there was a Jewish War, of any duration, one needed to have the war instigated by someone or someones.

They discussed Berman's work on Serapis as a precursor template to Christianity, which is what we have been saying for some time, and then this is used to proclaim that Christianity must be of the exact same nature, .... completely unhistorical. But, this is a non sequitur in my opinion. As was claimed by the Church fathers, Xianity is superior to its predecessors in that there was indeed real humans, following the ancient maxim of "as above, so below", and there was a graft per Romans 11. In the case of the ruling graft, the lower level Flavians (yet still of the elite Sabine tribe) superceded a line that descended from Caesar, the Ptolemaic pharaohs, and Parthian royalty.

In this vein they also talk about the impact of all this to Preterist and Futurist eschatology, which I claim that both are true in the sense that these are all human constructs, and in the latter case, we must necessarily be following THE script that WAS provided.

Near the end of the show Joe waxes on that we must continue in these efforts to destroy Christianity so as to improve the Democracy of the people, at the expense of the oligarchs. Hmmm. Sounds suspiciously subversive and liberal to me. o_O

 
Last edited:

Sgt Pepper

Active Member
Near the end of the show Joe waxes on that we must continue in these efforts to destroy Christianity so as to improve the Democracy of the people, at the expense of the oligarchs. Hmmm. Sounds suspiciously subversive and liberal to me. o_O
Yes, how does Joe reconcile this with what he's saying / his appearances on Tim Kelly's podcasts?
 

Richard Stanley

Administrator
Exactly.

Also, I added the following to the previous post as you were posting yours:
In this vein they also talk about the impact of all this to Preterist and Futurist eschatology, which I claim that both are true in the sense that these are all human constructs, and in the latter case, we must necessarily be following THE script that WAS provided.
 

Richard Stanley

Administrator
Continuing on with Ellis's Jesus, King of Edessa, he is discussing matters around the letter written by King Abgarus to Jesus, mentioned in Acts, and we seem to have, once again, a similar character, with similar names depending upon the account, acting as a go-between.

Of course the claimed letter is asking Jesus to cure some dread disease, but this is likely euphemistic code speak for something else. As when the term 'leper' had been used for people not of the right faith.

Moreover, in regards to the discussion that what made in the MythVision podcast just prior, Ellis is drawing out these linkages from an extra set of documents, the Syrian and Armenian ones, that make the claim that literally everything was made up out of whole cloth. Something real is being obfuscated IMHO.

Since it is looking increasingly like the gospel texts were recording the same events about the evangelism in Edessa, and since Saul-Josephus appears to have had a role in creating so many of these texts, it is not so surprising that we find the same kind of evangelism being recorded in Saul-Josephus’ Antiquities:
Now, during the time Izates abode at Charax-Spasini (Alexandria in Egypt), a certain Jewish merchant, whose name was Ananias, got among the women that belonged to the king, and taught them to worship God according to the Jewish religion. He, moreover, by their means, became known to Izates, and persuaded him, in like manner, to embrace that religion; he also, at the earnest entreaty of Izates, accompanied him when he was sent for by his father to come to Adiabene. (Ant 20:2:3)
So was this evangelism by Ananias in Adiabene, while Prince Izas-Jesus was away in Egypt, the same as the evangelism being undertaken in Edessa? Was this Ananias the same as the apostle Addai-Thaddaeus who went to Edessa? The answer is: nearly, but not quite. What Josephus appears to have done here, is not to record the name of the apostle, Addai-Thaddaeus, but to record the name of the Edessan messenger or ambassador instead.
According to Eusebius, the messenger-ambassador who took the letters from King Abgar in Edessa to Jesus in Jerusalem, and returned with the replies, was called Ananias. Alternatively, The Doctrine of Addai calls this same ambassador Hannan, but this is simply a derivation of the name Ananias. Likewise, in the Acts of Thaddaeus, another 3rd century apocryphal gospel written by a Christian apologist, it can again be seen that the Edessan ambassador who went to and from Jerusalem was called Ananias.
And about the days of the Passion and the plots of the Jews, Abgarus, being seized by an incurable disease, sent a letter to Christ by Ananias the courier, to the following effect: To Jesus called Christ, Abgarus the governor of the country of the Edessans, an unworthy slave. The multitude of the wonders done by you has been heard of by me, that you heal the blind, the lame, and the paralytic, and cure all the insane; and on this account I entreat you goodness to come to us, and escape from the plottings of the wicked Jews. (Acts of Thaddaeus.)
And just to combine all of these similar accounts into one history, this same Edessan messenger called Ananias was most probably the same as the Ananias who met with Saul in Damascus in Acts 9:10.
What Josephus has done here, is to deliberately swap the ambassador with the apostle, so that readers would not immediately see that Adiabene was a location in the Osrhoene, and thus King Izates was closely linked to King Abgarus. Had Josephus said that it was Addai-Thaddaeus who had ‘got among the women that belonged to the king at Adiabene’, the truth of the matter would have been obvious: the Apostle Addai actually went to Edessa, and so ‘Adiabene’ would have to be a reference to Edessa. So this was a minor but essential Josephusian deceit, that appears to have done its job for nearly 2,000 years - for historians still do not realise that the royal family of Adiabene was the same as the royal family of Edessa.
Ellis, Ralph. Jesus, King of Edessa (The King Jesus Trilogy Book 3) . Edfu Books. Kindle Edition.​

Ellis goes on to discuss some argumentation in the Talmud about whether or not Cordyenians and Tadmorians could be accepted as Jewish converts or not. Ellis claims the former means Babylonians, and Tadmor seems obvious to refer to Palmyra, the new city linked to Edessa.

This is relevant because we are in the period where Paul is discussing the changes he wants to make in the early church discussed in the Bible. Thus:
Thus two further apostles, Judas Barsabas and Silas, were sent to Antioch-Edessa to confirm that circumcision was not required to become members of Judaism Lite. It would appear that Saul (Josephus), ever the pragmatist, had won the argument and kept the older generation of the royal family of Edessa-Adiabene ‘on side’. But it was this break from Orthodox Judaism that eventually sowed the seeds of the doctrinal split between the Nazarene Judaism of James and Jesus and the Simple Judaism of Saul-Josephus. The Nazarene Fourth Sect of Jesus and James were having to relax their demands in the face of opposition from the elder royals at Edessa, and it was this same relaxation that precipitated the split between the hard-line Nazarene Church of Jesus and James, and the more relaxed Rome-friendly Simple Judaism of Saul-Josephus.
Ellis, Ralph. Jesus, King of Edessa (The King Jesus Trilogy Book 3) . Edfu Books. Kindle Edition.​

In reading this it just ocurred to me how funny and apropos it is to have this Schism of the Graft (Romans 11) center around the trimming of the male branch.

But let's suppose, in the fashion that I prefer, that the fix was in (the script) as to the new religion would practically have to accommodate that goy men would not likely convert if they understood they would have to get hacked on. As such, is it possible to conclude that all of this drama about should we allow this or that is indeed drama meant for a specific impact on the later audiences?
 

Seeker

Active Member
there was a graft per Romans 11. In the case of the ruling graft, the lower level Flavians (yet still of the elite Sabine tribe) superceded a line that descended from Caesar, the Ptolemaic pharaohs, and Parthian royalty.
According to Charles N. Pope on his "Domain of Man" site, the Flavians were secretly part of this Uber-Elite family already. "Jesus" was actually the son of Caesarion, with Vespasian as his brother, which would certainly explain both of them inheriting the "gospel" left by Julius Caesar, their grandfather, and utilizing it for their assigned roles in this royal clan. It was Jesus, as the secret "Great King" of the World (succeeding his father Caesarion), who actually made the decision to violently put down the Jewish Revolt, not Nero, who was commissioned by Jesus after his "suicide" with the rule of Parthia (!), under the name of Vologases, and he became the Apostle James to Jesus. Vespasian was commissioned by Jesus to rule over Rome, and became the Apostle John to him. Thus, they get the thrones to the left and right hands of Jesus that they requested of him in Mark 10:35-37, because looking at a map of the ancient world at that time would put Rome to the right (hand)/west of Jesus, with Parthia to the left(hand)/east of him, with respect to the central and superior throne of Jesus, in a global/geographical sense. If the "Pope" is anywhere near being accurate in his spinning of this tale, you can certainly see a superior ruling "graft" at work here!
 

Seeker

Active Member
Whew, I don't even know if I can explain this guy in one post, as I may have mentioned before, he makes my head spin! For Postflaviana purposes, I guess the best place to start is here: http://www.domainofman.com/boards/index.php?topic=172.0 and see if it makes any sense to you, or if he is a stark raving mad crackpot. As I mentioned before, he seems to believe that there was always one Uber-Elite family, that because of their extreme wealth and power could assume various identities and disguises, travel abroad and rule various countries, "die" and be "resurrected" as another person in another country, and fool the common people, who basically stayed in one village all of their lives, never actually saw their rulers, unless at a distance (doubles could also be used to achieve this effect). The elite men had multiple children with multiple elite women, who played at being multiple identities of wives of these different elite men, with of course the multiple elite children not even recognized in public as siblings of one other, as "Jesus" and "Vespasian" most certainly were not. If I had to describe Pope in one sentence, I would have to say that he is like Ellis and Roman Piso combined on a much grander scale, but he certainly knows how to tie things up into one humongous pretty picture, which no one else will probably believe.
 

Richard Stanley

Administrator
There do seem to be some instances where one can indeed make the case that the common people never saw their king in the flesh, and I suppose its possible that some other kings were puppet vassal kings unbeknownst to history. Indeed, this is generally the concept of the 'corporation' of the Uber-Elite family, or more likely ... tribe.
 

Seeker

Active Member
There do seem to be some instances where one can indeed make the case that the common people never saw their king in the flesh, and I suppose its possible that some other kings were puppet vassal kings unbeknownst to history. Indeed, this is generally the concept of the 'corporation' of the Uber-Elite family, or more likely ... tribe.
(1) Yes, some people were able to travel to their capital city, where they would see the king on a balcony addressing the people, but he could very well be a double also at that distance.
(2) It could also work the other way around, according to Pope, the vassal king could actually be a famous major player of the family corporation who had to resign his more prestigious position by "dying", because he was found wanting in the requirements to become a "Great King". For example, Pope has this happening to Mark Antony, who after his "suicide" becomes Herod the Great, a puppet vassal king of Rome. Conventional history knows nothing of this, of course, but Pope believes that the corporation had the immense wealth and power to enable its members to play any role that was required of them, they were more like actors than royalty.
(3) True, this is not strictly the genealogy of a "family", as I have loosely termed it. Rulers without sons could not pass on their power, of course, and the throne would go to a relative. However, adoptions were very common also, so that it might look as though a son were succeeding in some cases, but in the special case of the Great King, he had to have a natural born son to succeed him, if I am understanding Pope correctly, or that supreme title would go to someone else.

Incidentally, Pope believes that a natural catastrophe occurred in 1159 BC, 18 years off from yours in 1177 BC, if I have this right. However, he really goes off the radar, in my opinion, by starting "conventional" history, such as the Egyptian Dynasties, after this disaster. He also stated on his Homepage that "This site features avant garde research in the area of the Armana Period in Egypt and its relation to Biblical Israel. This research presently offers the greatest potential (!) for a profound improvement in our understanding of the origins of Judaism and Christianity, as well as our ability to reconcile Archaeology and the Bible." Sound familiar?
 

Richard Stanley

Administrator
Incidentally, Pope believes that a natural catastrophe occurred in 1159 BC, 18 years off from yours in 1177 BC, if I have this right. However, he really goes off the radar, in my opinion, by starting "conventional" history, such as the Egyptian Dynasties, after this disaster. He also stated on his Homepage that "This site features avant garde research in the area of the Armana Period in Egypt and its relation to Biblical Israel. This research presently offers the greatest potential (!) for a profound improvement in our understanding of the origins of Judaism and Christianity, as well as our ability to reconcile Archaeology and the Bible." Sound familiar?
Randall Carlson presented a timeline of catastrophes, of which one seems to have preceded the LBA collapse. This is otherwise mainstream acknowledged in that it is known that this time was accompanied by a series of earthquakes called a 'quake storm'. It seems that science is also starting to accept that some quakes and volcanism is caused by such as asteroid and comet strikes of sufficient kinetic energy, of which we have about one event every 50 years on average since the end of the last ice age. I will likely post these on the new Atlantis thread.

Carlson believes we need to stop all these wars and globally focus on killing asteroids and comets, one way or another. Maybe refocus the profit incentives?

The year 1177 BCE is from the archaeologist Cline (and his book) and was only intended as a provisional date, subject to revision.

I will try to visit Pope's site soon and see what is going on with it.
 

Richard Stanley

Administrator
Here Ellis's further discussion of the communications between Abgar/Abgarus/Agabus and the apostles reveals again an identical concern about circumcision in Josephus' Antiquities.

So the king (Monobazus-Izates) at that time complied with these persuasions of Ananias (not to be circumcised). But afterwards, as he had not quite left off his desire of doing this thing, a certain other Jew that came out of Galilee, whose name was Eleazar, and who was esteemed very skillful in the learning of his country, persuaded him to do the thing (circumcision). (Ant 20:2:4)
Here we have a duplication of the battle of circumcision that is recorded in the New Testament, with some of the Nazarene leadership in Jerusalem still promoting circumcision and Saul (Josephus) continuing to ridicule the procedure. In Josephus’ account in Antiquities, it is the apostle Eleazar who is the hard-line Nazarene, and it is Ananias who is the moderate.
Ellis, Ralph. Jesus, King of Edessa (The King Jesus Trilogy Book 3) . Edfu Books. Kindle Edition.​
 

Richard Stanley

Administrator
I have decided to make an unusually long excerpt of the following as it would be hard to convey everything it communicates in a summary. It provides further arguments that the royals of Edessa are what was being hidden by Josephus.

These same close family ties between the Edessan and Parthian monarchies are further confirmed by the fact that two of the later kings of Edessa were called Abgar bar Phraates. Thus the 3rd century Edessan monarchs were taking the king-name of the Phraates kings of Parthia, even though this name had not been used in Parthia since the turn of the 1st century. They did so not because they admired Parthia, but because the first monarch of Edessa was called Phraates - this was King Abgar-Monobazus-Phraates V, the son of Queen Ourania and the husband of Queen Helena.
Similarly, there is a very similar link between the Edessan royalty and Josephus’ semi-mythical king called Izates, the son of Queen Helena of Adiabene. Two of the 2nd century AD monarchs of Edessa were called Abgarus ben Ezad and Manu ben Ezad, and yet Professor Robert Eisenman and others have taken these titles as meaning ‘Abgarus son of Izates’ and ‘Manu son of Izates’ respectively. In fact, von Gutschmid in his Die Konigsnamen in den apokryphen Apostelgeschichten (1864) simply lists these Edessan monarchs as being ‘son of Izates’. But this acknowledgement means that there must be a direct link between the Edessan royalty and the Adiabene royalty, as if they were one and the same family. It also means that if Abgarus VII ben Izates, who reigned from 109 - 116 AD, was more than forty years of age when he came to the throne, it is entirely possible that he was a son of the last King Izates mentioned by Josephus (who is likely to have vacated the Edessan throne in AD 71). This evidence, when taken together with the dramatic evidence to come in Chapter X, means that this monarch is likely to have been a son of the biblical Jesus.
The obvious reason for these Edessan royal titles recalling names of the Parthian and Adiabenan royal lines, is that this is where the Edessan royal family came from, for they were directly related to the Phraates kings of Parthia. As has been explained previously, it is likely that Queen Helena (nee Princess Julia-Ourania) was the daughter of Queen Ourania, and yet Queen Ourania was the wife of King Phraates IV of Parthia. Since sibling marriage was de rigueur within these Egypto-Judaean royal families, it is likely that their son, Phraates V (Phraataces), eventually married his sister, Julia-Helena, after they had been exiled from Parthia. This is why Saul-Josephus claimed that King Monobazus married his sister, Queen Helena - he did, but Saul-Josephus was merely being economical with the truth as far as the name of the king was concerned. In reality, this was King Abgar V marrying his sister, Queen Helena.
Professor Eisenman theorises that Queen Helena may have been a secondary wife of King Abgarus of Edessa, who was given possession of ‘Adiabene’ at a later date. His assertion is based upon a passage in Moses of Chorene’s History of Armenia, which records a civil war in Edessa during which Prince Sanadroug killed all of the male children of King Abgarus. (This may be a garbled reference to the aftermath of the Jewish Revolt, during which many of these sons did indeed die. But Helena would not have been alive at this late date, of course.) Prince Sanadroug then sent Queen Helena to Kharan (Harran) and gave her sovereignty over ‘all of Mesopotamia’:
Sanadroug sent Helena to the town of Kharan, and left her to the sovereignty of the whole of Mesopotamia, in remembrance of the benefits he had received from King Abgar by Helena’s means. (Moses of Chorene, History of Armenia 10.)
The lands of Kharan can be equated with Harran, a region and city just to the south of Edessa, and yet these are the very same the lands that were given to King Izates in the accounts of Josephus, as we saw in the previous chapter. But since all these accounts are recording the same events, it is not so surprising that Josephus records that this very same region was given to a very similar people:
Accordingly, when Herod understood that a Jew had come out of Babylon … he sent for this man, with the multitude that followed him, and promised to give him land in the toparchy called Batanea, which country is bounded with Trachonitis, as desirous to make that his habitation a guard to himself. Ant 17:2:1
Again we see the same old story about a powerful family of Jews from Parthia (Babylon), who had just arrived in Syria in the early 1st century AD. And again we see Herod (actually Octavian) donating lands in the east of Syria to these refugees from Babylonia, just as it would appear that Queen Helena was also inheriting lands to the ‘east’ from Sanadroug, the son of King Abgar. But these were not lands as far east as the Tigris, in ‘Adiabene’, they were actually located in eastern Syria - in Edessa, Harran, Batanea and Aurania (or Palmyra). Once again we see that the life of King Abgar dovetails with the accounts for King Monobazus-Izates.
We can see in the above the possibility that if the Herods were really disguised Antonines, then a wider connection with Cleopatra to this region becomes even possible. Cleo VII was a tax farmer in Palestine, whose interests Antony tried to protect. There is also the hypotheis of Huller that Herod Agrippa was deeply involved as a possible Christ candidate.
Thus theses two very similar snippets of history may well have been recording not just the founding of Edessa, but also the founding of the great city of Palmyra by Queen Helena - a city that rose from nothing in the early 1st century AD to become one of the greatest cities of the Eastern Roman Empire. This sudden flowering of this new city is why Palmyra was called the City of the Phoenix Фoινιξ or Palmyra (a palm is called a phoenix in Greek, because its palm-fronds look like the wings of the giant Phoenix bird). However, having said that Phoenix-Palmyra was a Roman city, do remember that just like Edessa, Palmyra was always independent of both Rome and Parthia and continually played the one empire against the other for its own benefit.
This is why the greatest similarities to Edessan architecture and culture can be found in Palmyra, with these two city states both constructing tower tombs, complete with similar funerary busts, and both using the same type of ‘funerary banquet’ (Last Supper) imagery. In Fig 5.7 we can see the great wealth and luxury that was brought to Palmyra by Queen Helena and the exiled Parthians, with the ladies of the city literally dripping with jewellery. Note also that one of these funerary busts is of a daughter of Abgar. Since the name Abgar is so specific to the city of Edessa, and to its Abgarid royal family, this funerary bust is positive evidence of the close links that existed between the aristocracy of these two cities.
One can easily imagine the aristocracy of Palmyra being directly descended from Queen Ourania and Queen Helena, and perhaps that common ancestry can also be seen in the remarkable history of Queen Zenobia. The history of Zenobia is related more fully in the book King Jesus, but it is worth recalling that this particular royal line was noted for is dominant and hugely influential queens. From Queen Cleopatra of Egypt, to her daughters Queen Selene and Queen Ourania, to Queen Helena and Julia Domna and thence to Queen Zenobia, this royal line was noted for the command and rule of its queens. And just like the sons of Queen Helena, who attempted to take over the entire Roman Empire from a power-base in the small city of Edessa, so Queen Zenobia desperately tried likewise to become Empress of Rome from her small city-state at Palmyra. These women were nothing if not ambitious, and this circumstantial evidence again points towards there being strong links between these two arms of this same royal family.
Ellis, Ralph. Jesus, King of Edessa (The King Jesus Trilogy Book 3) . Edfu Books. Kindle Edition.​

We might also ponder a possible elite branch relationship between these powerful queens and the famous Amazon queens of Scythia (now historical and not legendary), using the premise that such as Hyksos 'Arya' (with their horses and chariots and such) took over Egypt.

Ellis goes on to discuss that the accounts of the 4th century Madame Egeria and the account of The Doctrine of Addai help confirm that Edessa is the real city being discussed by such mentions of 'Adiabene' by Josephus. This via their mentions of a city of Batanea, one travel outpost distant from Edessa. And thus also "east of the Euphrates" rather than "east of the Jordan" as from the Bible. Batanea likely being Bethany.
 
Of course the claimed letter is asking Jesus to cure some dread disease, but this is likely euphemistic code speak for something else. As when the term 'leper' had been used for people not of the right faith.
When Amarna was evacuated, the refugees were deemed to be 'lepers'. Certainly a major reason for that is some sort of plague was running rampant there. It was probably not Hansen's disease, but some foreign virus. Amarna was a cosmopolitan city (maybe the first) and would be exposed to diseases brought in by visitors. Possibly, the decent of the disease on Amarna was part of the reason Atonism was expunged. The heresy of Atonism was the cause of the 'leprosy'.
 

Seeker

Active Member
We might also ponder a possible elite branch relationship between these powerful queens and the famous Amazon queens of Scythia (now historical and not legendary)
I have been pondering this, or perhaps I should say "reconciling" (in the shadow of Tupper Saussy), and Cleopatra was a direct descendant of Ptolemy I Soter (Savior), founder of the Ptolemaic Dynasty of Egypt, and supposed to be the half-brother of Alexander the Great, who according to the "Alexander Romance" fathered a daughter by Thalestris, Queen of the Amazons, so if this is true the royal line of her Amazon descendants would be cousins of the royal line of Queen Cleopatra and her descendants, quite fitting, if not exactly historical.
 

Attachments

Seeker

Active Member
Also, Cleopatra and her descendants may possibly have a direct descent (mythological, of course?) from Amazon Queen Orithia, the daughter of Amazon Queen Marpesia. Queen Orithia had children Chione, CLEOPATRA, and the two Argonauts Calais and Zetes, the result of a kidnapping by Doreas, the North Wind! Maybe this picture will help increase the circulation also!
 

Attachments

Seeker

Active Member
It also means that if Abgarus VII ben Izates, who reigned from 109 - 116 AD, was more than forty years of age when he came to the throne, it is entirely possible that he was a son of the last King Izates mentioned by Josephus (who is likely to have vacated the Edessan throne in AD 71). This evidence, when taken together with the dramatic evidence to come in Chapter X, means that this monarch is likely to have been a son of the biblical Jesus.
Abgarus VII ben Izates apparently had no son, but a brother to succeed him. He may have had an unnamed daughter, however, who married a Priest-King of Emesa, thus becoming the ancestress (or another wife of the ancestor) of some Severan Roman Emperors, including Elagabalus, who would thus be a descendant of or have a family relationship to "Jesus", with this establishing a genealogical connection to Deva Victrix in Chester, where Jesus was supposedly exiled according to Ellis, and help explain why Elagabalus renovated it. According to "Roman Piso", Elagabalus and other Severans would have a descent from "Jesus" anyway, as this Priest-King of Emesa was himself a great-grandson of Arrius Calpurnius Piso, aka "Jesus". Another branch of this line, this time from the original couple, continues through to the medieval Crusader Kings of Jerusalem and then to Elizabeth Woodville, among others, who married Plantagenet (de Vere line?) King Edward IV, and are the ancestors to European crowned (and uncrowned) dynasties today. This line could also lead to the wife of William the Conqueror, which means that many English and Americans, including Prime Ministers and Presidents, possibly descend from it.
 
Last edited:
Top