Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
In the following long excerpt from Bartram, we see that he and Bardaisan has stumbled across the same issue with the same royal dynasty as did Ellis, and at the very same time (see the red highlighted text below). As we know, Ellis has relocated Josephus' misdirection from Adiabene to Edessa and identified the early first century Edessan royals as cuckholds from Parthia, Phraates IV and V and the secret daughter of Julius Caesar and Cleopatra VII, Thea Muse Ourania.

In any case, the focus is on the very same characters.

Abgar V the Black, Ukkāmā -- As Ellis suggests 'kama' for the black soil of Cleopatra's Nile?

...
And which king had famously converted to Judaism at this time? Izates/Izas, son of "Helen" of Adiabene.
The “Letter” would then be - to conflate the notices about “Letter’ or “Letters” in all our sources - a variation on the one James sent down via “Judas Barsabas” ( a.k.a. Judas the brother of James, a.k.a. Judas the Zealot, a.k.a Judas Thomas, a.k,a. Thaddaeus, a.k.a. Lebbaeus - and a.k,a., possibly, “Judas Iscariot” ) to “Antioch” with his rulings appertaining to overseas communities, even according to Acts’ somewhat tendentious presentation. In other words, what we have in this Qumran archive, are copies of the actual letter, brought down by Judas, James’ brother, to the “King” of the Edessenes or Adiabene -- which is unimportant. [Bartram's quote from?: (James D. G. Dunn, "4QMMT and Galatians," New Testament Studies 43 (1997): 151) - rs]​
This is the ruler, playfully misnamed by Josephus as Izates and Izas:
Abgar V the Black or Abgarus V of Edessa (Syriac: ܐܒܓܪ ܚܡܝܫܝܐ ܐܘܟܡܐ‏; ʾAḇgar Ḥəmīšāyā ʾUkkāmā, Armenian: Աբգար Ե; Abgar E, Ancient Greek: Ἄβγαρος Abgaros) BC 4 – AD 7 and AD 13–50) was an historical Syriac ruler of the kingdom of Osroene, holding his capital at Edessa.
And this is the problem for Bardaisan, wanting to justify his friend taking over the rule there in the late second century: to him, the lineage of the rulers from the early-first century until his time are invalid, which means a 'mistake' was made at the start of the dynasty in the first century.
Bardaisan's explanation for this purported error he reveals in the trial of the divine man: he has two of the same name, one being:
Barabbas or Jesus Barabbas (a Hellenization of the Aramaic bar abba בר אבא, literally "son of the father" or "Jesus, son of the Father" respectively) is a figure in the accounts of the Passion of Christ, in which he is the insurrectionary whom Pontius Pilate freed at the Passover feast in Jerusalem, instead of Jesus...
Bardaisan lets the insurrectionist go free, because he - Abgar/Izates - takes over Edessa. The divine man is crucified as 'king of the Jews' because Bardaisan regards this man as the rightful king dispossed. All this theological myth-making for such a small matter - rule of a small state few know and nobody cares about.
The political mistake Bardaisan and the king make is in attaching blame to imperial Roman authority - Pilate - and the Herodian Sanhedrin. The result is that he goes on the run from Severan authority, though the ending is inevitable: the king is invited to Rome and killed, Bardaisan disappears and Rome takes over the kingdom.
That could have ended the story, but (a) Izates is a hero-cult figure in Northern Mesopotamia and by the end of the second century is put on a pedestal as a divine man, and (b) the Chrestian Church is growing nearby, in Asia Minor. He appears in Luke/Acts:
One of them, named Agabus, stood up and through the Spirit predicted that a severe famine would spread over the entire Roman world. (This happened during the reign of Claudius.) (Acts 11:28)
Where did Luke find his raw material for the prophecy of Agabus of a great famine to transpire in Claudius' reign, of Paul's trip from Antioch to deliver famine relief funds to Jerusalem, and for the earlier tale of Philip and the Ethiopian eunuch? Again, from Josephus (though perhaps also from other cognate sources of information). It all stems, by hook and by crook, from the story of Helen, Queen of Adiabene, a realm contiguous and/or overlapping with Edessa, whose king Agbar/Abgarus some sources make Helen's husband. (Robert Eiseman's JAMES THE BROTHER OF JESUS: A Higher-Critical Evaluation by Robert M. Price)
...
 

Seeker

Well-Known Member
(a) Izates is a hero-cult figure in Northern Mesopotamia and by the end of the second century is put on a pedestal as a divine man, and (b) the Chrestian Church is growing nearby, in Asia Minor.
I am trying to put some of the foregoing into a nutshell, and probably missing a lot. So Izates is "crucified" as the sacrificial king, and then taken to Rome in AD 70 (according to Roman Piso, he is also St. Peter, the first "Pope" there), lives in England until about the end of the 1st century (unless he goes to yet another Hidden Resort in Asia, per legend and Charles N. Pope), and becomes "divine", like Julius Caesar, by the end of the 2nd century. The New Testament writings (cobbled together with conflated earlier histories and persona) and the "Christian" church (amalgamated Chrestian, Mithraic, Emperor worship, etc.) are not starting to be in a recognizable form until about the time of Constantine the Great, first quarter 4th century. By then Constantine has moved his "Rome" to Constantinople, much closer geographically to this evolving movement towards becoming the Roman Catholic Church. Before the end of the fourth century, the "Pontifex Maximus" is officially the Pope, not the Roman Emperor. In the 5th century, when the "barbarians" overrun Italy and Rome, the Pope later known as St. Leo is the man in charge. Rome does not "fall", but merely changes its outer form. Izates, the great-grandson of his prototype Julius Caesar, is now known as "Jesus", posthumously ruling the World and the Universe, finally "victorious" over death.
 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
Well, I haven't gone that far to integrate all those aspects. I'll be happy if I can reconcile Bartram with the Flavian era gospel dating, and thus Atwill, etc.. Bartram has admitted in the new site that there is an early dating possibility. I sent him an email tonight about this and Ellis' take on the Edessan family.

Bartram also stated on one page that he is indeed writing a book.
 

Seeker

Well-Known Member
I shall have to investigate Mr. Bartram's site more thoroughly. Looking forward to see the answers you get from him, to boldly go where no Manu has gone before!
 

Seeker

Well-Known Member
I have been reading some of Bartram's old postings, to learn more about where he is coming from, in relation to Postflaviana, and was wondering, as far as origins go, can the Indo-Scythian "Azes" be reconciled with the Julius Caesar/Cleopatra descended "Izates" of Ellis, in "From Cleopatra to Christ"? Bartram appears to be the really scientific type, looking for concrete evidence, and does not allow for any speculation at all, with no "Jesus" until after the fall of the Western Roman Empire. This is not meant as criticism of him, merely my personal observation, after perusing many interesting articles that he has posted. I do find very intriguing, as I mentioned on another thread, that he has as a key player Antonia Minor, the mother of supposed male line de Vere ancestor, the Roman Emperor Claudius. IF Nicholas de Vere is right about this de Vere family origin (probably not a "scientific" observation [lol]), then they were into what became the Roman "Chrestian/Christian" dissimilation from the very beginning, long before they were even surnamed de Vere! VEREY appropriate, that this "Greek magic" could be part of the composition of de Vere "Dragon magic", over the centuries, for them. I remember, in his day, that Edward de Vere (supposed to have studied with Elizabethan "magician" John Dee), was supposed to have had distinguished Roman ancestry, you can't get any better than that for linkage!
 
Last edited:

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
And "the Truth shall set you Free". For a fee.

Yes, it has long been my opinion that the whole business was planned from at least Pontifex Julius to whenever the Chrestian 'eta's were turned in 'iotas' per Bartram's theory.

Bartram has Chrestianity as an esoteric insider cult, which quietly establishes itself as a deeply embedded Deep State, and generally this makes a lot of sense to me, as 'conservatives' are by default highly suspicious of innovations in government and culture. Not every patrician can be trusted to be in on the new plan, and the Roman system, like the Abraxis family, allowed for bitter factions more than willing to take the first good opportunity to play King of the Palatine Hill. And most changes, whether good or bad, end up with some unhappy 'losers'.

One very nice thing is that the Flavian fish and anchor plays very well with the esoteric Chrestian scenario, especially since the fish and anchor was also the 'Christian' symbol centuries before the cross was. And this is why we find so much more similar esotericism and Platonism in the NT, ala found discussed in such as Fideler's Jesus Christ, Sun of God.

And I see this continuity extending throughout the span of 'Western Civilization', the possible lineal continuity of the De Veres' et al. part of the intended Divide and Conquer false dialectic that has proved so successful.

As Bartram complains about why scholars are so blind, answering himself that universities in England are yet legally responsible for towing the state religious line, and thus become part of the informal pecking order of social self-konformity that trickles down into academia and other institutions beyond England. Of course, Bernal highly detailed the conformity system in 'modern' academia.
 

Seeker

Well-Known Member
I just had a very strange thought (the latest for me, anyway). With all of the disparate esoteric information that Postflaviana is gathering together, is it still allowed to exist because of the Illuminati protocol to allow "truth in plain sight" to be initially published, according to their rules of play? This is the very ominous year of 2020, and before the also ominous commencement of the last millennium, Tupper Saussy was allowed to initially publish his "Rulers of Evil", under the protective "Mark of Cain", which is the Royal Signature of Anu. Could Postflavian protection be in the name of Richard StANUley?:eek:
 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
Be careful how you use the word 'strange'. o_O They are a branch of the family, connected tightly to the bloody drama with Richard III.

I don't know about Anu, but the name supposedly means "stone field or meadow", an odd mashup of Anglo-Saxon and French.

I'm guessing we are indeed 'allowed' to continue because our POV (and my communication style) is so at odds with cradle-to-grave formed consensus reality, that it will have little negative impact to the PTB.
 

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
With all of the disparate esoteric information that Postflaviana is gathering together, is it still allowed to exist because of the Illuminati protocol to allow "truth in plain sight" to be initially published, according to their rules of play?
I've invited many of my local friends & acquaintances to review the site. They generally complain that the material is obscure and incomprehensible. I imagine that if any Illuminati agents have tried to investigate the site, they similarly come away baffled and unable to make heads or tails of it, or figure out which side we're on.
 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
They generally complain that the material is obscure and incomprehensible.
This is all true, however, this is yet one aspect of the culturing of the contemporary worldview. Critiques of religion are irrelevant to to most, but not all, secularists. Same with ancient history. It's all self-limiting, like a form of herd immunity.
 

Seeker

Well-Known Member
Be careful how you use the word 'strange'. o_O They are a branch of the family, connected tightly to the bloody drama with Richard III.
Thank You for the advice, Richard, one of my medieval descents is from the Lord Strange family of Knockyn, so they may be my "protection" here.
I imagine that if any Illuminati agents have tried to investigate the site, they similarly come away baffled and unable to make heads or tails of it, or figure out which side we're on.
Now YOU are making me wonder (just kidding!).
It's all self-limiting, like a form of herd immunity.
Ditto to my reply to Jerry (lol).
 

Seeker

Well-Known Member
the whole business was planned from at least Pontifex Julius
Tupper Saussy may have an answer to that, though I am pretty certain that John Bartram would dismiss this on the basis of no evidence, and of course we cannot ask Saussy where he obtained this information. On page 214 of "Rulers of Evil" he states, "The land of the Pyramid, Egypt, is where Caesarean Rome was inaugurated. By “Caesarean” I mean the empire whose head commands not only affairs of state but those of religion as well. Caesarean Rome officially began in Alexandria , Egypt, at the temple of Jupiter, on the winter solstice – December 25 – in the year 48 B C , when a fifty-two-year-old priest of Jupiter was declared to be Jupiter’s incarnation, thus “Son of God.”
Of course Saussy is talking about Julius Caesar, who ironically inaugurated the Roman New World Order on what became Christmas Day (!!!). Is that why we really celebrate it? By this time his consort Queen Cleopatra, the personification of Isis and the inheritor of the Egyptian/Greek mysteries/magic, was carrying their child Caesarion, born near the Summer Solstice (June 23) next year. This "marriage" of cultures presumably brought "Chrestianity" to Rome.
IF Charles N. Pope of the "Domain of Man" site is correct (again, I am pretty sure Bartram would dismiss him also), and Caesarion survived to become "Drusus", then his wife Antonia Minor was the key player in disseminating "Chrestianity" to future Roman client royalty, that she raised at Rome, along with to trusted freedmen associated with her there. Their son, the Roman Emperor Claudius, then becomes the male line ancestor of the "Dragon" line de Veres, according to Nicholas de Vere (strike three to be dismissed by Bartram). A "Risky Business" this is indeed, trying to figure it all out, it is certainly nothing that one can "Cruise" through lightly!:rolleyes: However, perhaps not in the way that Ralph Ellis envisioned (as John Bartram would probably agree), it does take us "From Cleopatra to Christ" (through "Caesar to Chrest").
 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
In this post, we will briefly revisit one of the pillars for our support of the Egyptian vector into Judaism, and thus also into Chreistianity (the now authorized Postflavian spelling for the Holy Amalgamation. o_O), besides the Ellis/Osman/Freud/Sabbah thesi, that is.

This being the metallurgist Robert Feather's book, The Copper Scroll. In that book Feather analyses the Qumran scroll variously (Six Ways from Aten Day?) and concludes that the origin is from Akhenaten's city of Akhenaten (aka Amarna). And thus that the Essenes (aka Ebionites, The Way, or Nazarites) were essentially distant remnants of the exiled court of Akhenaten. In other words, Jerusalem was essentially New Amarna (after pit stops in Petra (aka OG Mecca) and Bethel).

Feather's work is akin to the Sabbah brothers' in that they make hard linkages in time back to physical Egyptian history. Part of Feather's accomplishment came when he discovered that the scroll's 'treasure list' was not being interpreted through the proper units of measure, Egyptian units. And thus a cache of coins(?) that had been discovered at Amarna, in the correct location, also now matched the Egyptian units.

If the Sadducees were elite Hellenized Jews, and the original [sic] Pharisees were Persian Parsi influenced Jews, then might we consider that the Essenes were the oldest strata - retaining what they considered the original form - from Egypt and the Amenhotep III priesthood of the Yehud? If so, hence we see the Egyptian strata, the Persian strata, the Greek strata, and with the Roman intervention, the Roman strata. The Persian Pharisees are reformed into Roman Pharisees, the imperial/feudal buffer class and moral foils to the future exoteric universal Church per St. Augustine et al...

Before going further, let's first look at what John Bartram says in relating the Essenes and their DSS to the canonic gospels:

The book I reference here - I could not possibly review it - has more holes than the proverbial Swiss cheese. The author actually imagines that the New Testament contains a history of Judaea in the first century, with a real, actual, living, divine man Jesus. Oh dear, but never mind; here we'll treat a part of the chapter The Herodians of the Gospel of Mark:
The glaring lacuna of the missing Essenes in the New Testament has removed them from centre field. It would be )hard to construct a notion of Essene marginality on the basis of Philo or Josephus, yet they are missing in the New Testament and thus - given the dominant conceptual paradigms created by biblical literature - it seems obvious. Why would the Gospel-writers have avoided mentioning the Essenes if they were powerful players, deeply involved in public debate? If the Pharisees and Sadducees were concerned about Jesus’ interpretations of the law and actions, surely the Essenes - if they played a public role - would also have been concerned? As we have seen, in Philo and Josephus the Essenes are presented as the most exemplary of all Jewish legal ‘societies’ in Judaea and a key paradigm for Judaism as a whole; in the New Testament they are absolutely nowhere. (The Essenes, the Scrolls and the Dead Sea by Joan Taylor, Oxford University Press, 2015)
The gospel writers did not avoid mentioning this sect: the New Testament is all about them, in parody. They are whole point of the New Testament.
The sect which wrote much of the Dead Sea Scrolls, almost certainly in Qumran, next door to the caves in which they buried them, never gave themselves a formal title - not even once. It is therefore unrealistic to expect to find this non-existent title in the New Testament. Instead, they describe themselves using various terms: The Poor (Ebionim, Ebionites), The Way and Nazarite; they also had leaders with titles such as Righteous Teacher and Messiah. We see clear parody with Christian usage of Nazareth, the way and messiah.

I'm saddened to see how even the most modern and prestigious scholarship n this field just tramps along the old textual tradition, with nothing new or important to say.

As I have asserted beforer, the NZR in Nazarite is originally from the Egyptian for 'prince', and so the original and pure faith would really be followers of the royal prince, originally such as Akhy himself, or one of the other proposed pharaohs or a brother (depending on whose hypothesis). Like 'good' messianic Jews, Futurist Christians, or Muslims today, the apocalyptic Essenes back in the day were awaiting their messiah, a prince cum 'annointed' king.

This is what Queen Helen was doing in Jerusalem, trying three times to complete the 7 year Nazarite qualification process, and spending a tone of moolah to save the famine stricken Jerusalem. This in helping to curry favor for her son to become ...

Well, according to Ellis, essentially to become the Egypto-Persian-Greek-Roman King of the Jews. And, at the same time, Emperor of Rome. Why not? But what happened?

Well, as I have discussed before, the 'Egyptian' rebel discovered that the fig tree of fortune was barren, and thus it was not his time, but rather that of his distant Sabine cousins, the Flavians, (metaphorically 'Esau'). These wild branches who were grafted onto the domestic olive tree and its Root of Jesse (Romans 11). Not Zion, but Zoan - Egypt that is.

Thus the Essenes become parodied, as well as their allies the Zealots and Sicarii, and their 'prince' as well, who was really no more than another fake populist colluding with his cousins. Fake News or Good News? Whatever, Cleopatra's Chi-Rho passed through, as well did the Flavian Fish and Anchor, till they both got crossed up.

Just another day, or two, at the Abraxis corporate office.
 

Seeker

Well-Known Member
Essene parody here?

Matthew 26:6-12:"6Now when Jesus was in Bethany, in the house of Simon the leper, 7There came unto him a woman having an alabaster box of very precious ointment, and poured it on his head, as he sat at meat. 8But when his disciples saw it, they had indignation, saying, To what purpose is this waste? 9For this ointment might have been sold for much, and given to the POOR. 10When Jesus understood it, he said unto them, Why trouble ye the woman? for she hath wrought a good work upon me. 11For ye have the POOR always with you; but me ye have not always. 12For in that she hath poured this ointment on my body, she did it for my burial."

John 14:1-6:"1Let not your heart be troubled: ye believe in God, believe also in me. 2In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. 3And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also. 4And whither I go ye know, and the WAY ye know. 5Thomas saith unto him, Lord, we know not whither thou goest; and how can we know the WAY? 6Jesus saith unto him, I am the WAY, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me."

This is what Queen Helen was doing in Jerusalem, trying three times to complete the 7 year Nazarite qualification process, and spending a tone of moolah to save the famine stricken Jerusalem. This in helping to curry favor for her son to become ...

Well, according to Ellis, essentially to become the Egypto-Persian-Greek-Roman King of the Jews. And, at the same time, Emperor of Rome. Why not?
Yes, this sounds good and logical, but I don't think at this point Bartram agrees that the "Izates" of Ellis is the Indo-Scythian "Azes" that he discovered, and also will think that the Chrest/Christ timeline here needs to be stretched out by several centuries, perhaps all the way to after the founding of Islam, by which time the Western Roman "Chrestian" Empire has transformed into the Roman Catholic "Christian" Church. By the way, does Bartram think that the Roman Church and the Jesuits are pervasive to this very day, I haven't read anything about that yet on his sites.

Just another day, or two, at the Abraxis corporate office.
"Jupiter" Julius Seeker Thanks You for Your Service, reading this gives me a break from cleaning toilets, and perhaps my medieval "Strange" ancestry shares some DNA with your "Stanley" ancestry! o_O
 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
I need to clarify that what I wrote is my interpretation of Bartram and integration of that into my prior thinking. He didn't say anything about the Jesuits that I can remember.

Can you quote the Azes biz?
 
Last edited:
Top