Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
In searching for Josephus' Adiabene, I ran across the following translator's notes, and I have excerpted the respective text being referred to:

(7) This conduct of Izates is a sign that he was become either a Jew, or an Ebionite Christian, who indeed differed not much from proper Jews. See ch. 6. sect. 1. However, his supplications were heard, and he was providentially delivered from that imminent danger he was in.
(8) These pyramids or pillars, erected by Helena, queen of Adiabene, near Jerusalem, three in number, are mentioned by Eusebius, in his Eccles. Hist. B. II. ch. 12, for which Dr. Hudson refers us to Valesius's notes upon that place.--They are also mentioned by Pausanias, as hath been already noted, ch. 2. sect. 6. Reland guesses that that now called Absalom's Pillar may be one of them.

The referred conduct of Izates has him appealing to God to save him, but also evokes Jesus' asking God why he has been forsaken. Obviously opposite outcomes, as God saves Izates' uncircumsized bacon. Izates had wanted to get snipped, but he was advised that it was not politic.

In any case, Izates is betrayed by his own people.

See more comments later.

The following is from the Whiston translation: https://www.sacred-texts.com/jud/josephus/ant-20.htm

CHAPTER 4.
HOW IZATES WAS BETRAYED BY HIS OWN SUBJECTS, AND FOUGHT AGAINST BY THE ARABIANS AND HOW IZATES, BY THE PROVIDENCE OF GOD, WAS DELIVERED OUT OF THEIR HANDS.
1. NOW when the king's brother, Monobazus, and his other kindred, saw how Izates, by his piety to God, was become greatly esteemed by all men, they also had a desire to leave the religion of their country, and to embrace the customs of the Jews; but that act of theirs was discovered by Izates's subjects. Whereupon the grandees were much displeased, and could not contain their anger at them; but had an intention, when they should find a proper opportunity, to inflict a punishment upon them. Accordingly, they wrote to Abia, king of the Arabians, and promised him great sums of money, if he would make an expedition against their king; and they further promised him, that, on the first onset, they would desert their king, because they were desirous to punish him, by reason of the hatred he had to their religious worship; then they obliged themselves, by oaths, to be faithful to each other, and desired that he would make haste in this design. The king of Arabia complied with their desires, and brought a great army into the field, and marched against Izates; and, in the beginning of the first onset, and before they came to a close fight, those Handees, as if they had a panic terror upon them, all deserted Izates, as they had agreed to do, and, turning their backs upon their enemies, ran away. Yet was not Izates dismayed at this; but when he understood that the grandees had betrayed him, he also retired into his camp, and made inquiry into the matter; and as soon as he knew who they were that made this conspiracy with the king of Arabia, he cut off those that were found guilty; and renewing the fight on the next day, he slew the greatest part of his enemies, and forced all the rest to betake themselves to flight. He also pursued their king, and drove him into a fortress called Arsamus, and following on the siege vigorously, he took that fortress. And when he had plundered it of all the prey that was in it, which was not small, he returned to Adiabene; yet did not he take Abia alive, because, when he found himself encompassed on every side, he slew himself.
2. But although the grandees of Adiabene had failed in their first attempt, as being delivered up by God into their king's hands, yet would they not even then be quiet, but wrote again to Vologases, who was then king of Parthia, and desired that he would kill Izates, and set over them some other potentate, who should be of a Parthian family; for they said that they hated their own king for abrogating the laws of their forefathers, and embracing foreign customs. When the king of Parthia heard this, he boldly made war upon Izates; and as he had no just pretense for this war, he sent to him, and demanded back those honorable privileges which had been bestowed on him by his father, and threatened, on his refusal, to make war upon him. Upon hearing of this, Izates was under no small trouble of mind, as thinking it would be a reproach upon him to appear to resign those privileges that had been bestowed upon him out of cowardice; yet because he knew, that though the king of Parthia should receive back those honors, yet would he not be quiet, he resolved to commit himself to God, his Protector, in the present danger he was in of his life; and as he esteemed him to be his principal assistant, he intrusted his children and his wives to a very strong fortress, and laid up his corn in his citadels, and set the hay and the grass on fire. And when he had thus put things in order, as well as he could, he awaited the coming of the enemy. And when the king of Parthia was come, with a great army of footmen and horsemen, which he did sooner than was expected, (for he marched in great haste,) and had cast up a bank at the river that parted Adiabene from Media, - Izates also pitched his camp not far off, having with him six thousand horsemen. But there came a messenger to Izates, sent by the king of Parthia, who told him how large his dominions were, as reaching from the river Euphrates to Bactria, and enumerated that king's subjects; he also threatened him that he should be punished, as a person ungrateful to his lords; and said that the God whom he worshipped could not deliver him out of the king's hands. When the messenger had delivered this his message, Izates replied that he knew the king of Parthia's power was much greater than his own; but that he knew also that God was much more powerful than all men. And when he had returned him this answer, he betook himself to make supplication to God, and threw himself upon the ground, and put ashes upon his head, in testimony of his confusion, and fasted, together with his wives and children. (7) Then he called upon God, and said, "O Lord and Governor, if I have not in vain committed myself to thy goodness, but have justly determined that thou only art the Lord and principal of all beings, come now to my assistance, and defend me from my enemies, not only on my own account, but on account of their insolent behavior with regard to thy power, while they have not feared to lift up their proud and arrogant tongue against thee." Thus did he lament and bemoan himself, with tears in his eyes; whereupon God heard his prayer. And immediately that very night Vologases received letters, the contents of which were these, that a great band of Dahe and Sacse, despising him, now he was gone so long a journey from home, had made an expedition, and laid Parthis waste; so that he [was forced to] retire back, without doing any thing. And thus it was that Izates escaped the threatenings of the Parthians, by the providence of God.

3. It was not long ere Izates died, when he had completed fifty-five years of his life, and had ruled his kingdom twenty-four years. He left behind him twenty-four sons and twenty-four daughters. However, he gave order that his brother Monobazus should succeed in the government, thereby requiting him, because, while he was himself absent after their father's death, he had faithfully preserved the government for him. But when Helena, his mother, heard of her son's death, she was in great heaviness, as was but natural, upon her loss of such a most dutiful son; yet was it a comfort to her that she heard the succession came to her eldest son. Accordingly, she went to him in haste; and when she was come into Adiabene, she did not long outlive her son Izates. But Monobazus sent her bones, as well as those of Izates, his brother, to Jerusalem, and gave order that they should be buried at the pyramids (8) which their mother had erected; they were three in number, and distant no more than three furlongs from the city Jerusalem. But for the actions of Monobazus the king, which he did during the rest of his life. we will relate them hereafter.-
And so, this Izates, at least, dies before the war. And, at least from the Whiston translation, the only location inference is that the king of Parthia asserts his dominions extend to the Euphrates. But, this could mean that he is claiming dominion over Adiabene if it is indeed such as Arbela/Irbil instead of Edessa. But, there is other reason to believe that Helena is from Edessa.
 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
And from earlier in the Izates story we find out that:

  • Izates is providentially born safely via a dream from God. Daddy Monobazus was warned not to kill poor Izates in the womb
  • That Izates is his father's beloved and only begotten son, despite many other brothers including his older brother Monobazus by the same mother
  • That Izates is granted a country from his father-in-law, and a country, Carra (Carrhae/Harran?), from his father
  • That country is where Noah's ark landed, according to Josephus. Of which Carrhae is down the road from Edessa and Gobekli Tepe BTW
  • Upon succession to his father's throne, he shows clemency from execution to his rival brothers, albeit sending some to Rome and Parthia as hostages (so he is on good enough terms with Rome)
  • He wants to get circumsized, but his mother and a Jew persuade him not to. The Jew tells him that it is his belief in God that is more important than circumcision. Hmmm
  • After Helena provides famine relief to Jerusalem, Izates sends them more aid
Izates is like Isaac, Joseph, and Jesus.

CHAPTER 2.
HOW HELENA THE QUEEN OF ADIABENE AND HER SON IZATES, EMBRACED THE JEWISH RELIGION; AND HOW HELENA SUPPLIED THE POOR WITH CORN, WHEN THERE WAS A GREAT FAMINE AT JERUSALEM.
1. ABOUT this time it was that Helena, queen of Adiabene, and her son Izates, changed their course of life, and embraced the Jewish customs, and this on the occasion following: Monobazus, the king of Adiabene, who had also the name of Bazeus, fell in love with his sister Helena, and took her to be his wife, and begat her with child. But as he was in bed with her one night, he laid his hand upon his wife's belly, and fell asleep, and seemed to hear a voice, which bid him take his hand off his wife's belly, and not hurt the infant that was therein, which, by God's providence, would be safely born, and have a happy end. This voice put him into disorder; so he awaked immediately, and told the story to his wife; and when his son was born, he called him Izates. He had indeed Monobazus, his elder brother, by Helena also, as he had other sons by other wives besides. Yet did he openly place all his affections on this his only begotten (2) son Izates, which was the origin of that envy which his other brethren, by the same father, bore to him; while on this account they hated him more and more, and were all under great affliction that their father should prefer Izates before them. Now although their father was very sensible of these their passions, yet did he forgive them, as not indulging those passions out of an ill disposition, but out of a desire each of them had to be beloved by their father. However, he sent Izates, with many presents, to Abennerig, the king of Charax-Spasini, and that out of the great dread he was in about him, lest he should come to some misfortune by the hatred his brethren bore him; and he committed his son's preservation to him. Upon which Abennerig gladly received the young man, and had a great affection for him, and married him to his own daughter, whose name was Samacha: he also bestowed a country upon him, from which he received large revenues.
2. But when Monobazus was grown old, and saw that he had but a little time to live, he had a mind to come to the sight of his son before he died. So he sent for him, and embraced him after the most affectionate manner, and bestowed on him the country called Carra; it was a soil that bare amomum in great plenty: there are also in it the remains of that ark, wherein it is related that Noah escaped the deluge, and where they are still shown to such as are desirous to see them. (3) Accordingly, Izates abode in that country until his father's death. But the very day that Monobazus died, queen Helena sent for all the grandees, and governors of the kingdom, and for those that had the armies committed to their command; and when they were come, she made the following speech to them: "I believe you are not unacquainted that my husband was desirous Izates should succeed him in the government, and thought him worthy so to do. However, I wait your determination; for happy is he who receives a kingdom, not from a single person only, but from the willing suffrages of a great many." This she said, in order to try those that were invited, and to discover their sentiments. Upon the hearing of which, they first of all paid their homage to the queen, as their custom was, and then they said that they confirmed the king's determination, and would submit to it; and they rejoiced that Izates's father had preferred him before the rest of his brethren, as being agreeable to all their wishes: but that they were desirous first of all to slay his brethren and kinsmen, that so the government might come securely to Izates; because if they were once destroyed, all that fear would be over which might arise from their hatred and envy to him. Helena replied to this, that she returned them her thanks for their kindness to herself and to Izates; but desired that they would however defer the execution of this slaughter of Izates's brethren till he should be there himself, and give his approbation to it. So since these men had not prevailed with her, when they advised her to slay them, they exhorted her at least to keep them in bonds till he should come, and that for their own security; they also gave her counsel to set up some one whom she could put the greatest trust in, as a governor of the kingdom in the mean time. So queen Helena complied with this counsel of theirs, and set up Monobazus, the eldest son, to be king, and put the diadem upon his head, and gave him his father's ring, with its signet; as also the ornament which they call Sampser, and exhorted him to administer the affairs of the kingdom till his brother should come; who came suddenly upon hearing that his father was dead, and succeeded his brother Monobazus, who resigned up the government to him.
3. Now, during the time Izates abode at Charax-Spasini, 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; it also happened that Helena, about the same time, was instructed by a certain other Jew and went over to them. But when Izates had taken the kingdom, and was come to Adiabene, and there saw his brethren and other kinsmen in bonds, he was displeased at it; and as he thought it an instance of impiety either to slay or imprison them, but still thought it a hazardous thing for to let them have their liberty, with the remembrance of the injuries that had been offered them, he sent some of them and their children for hostages to Rome, to Claudius Caesar, and sent the others to Artabanus, the king of Parthia, with the like intentions.
4. And when he perceived that his mother was highly pleased with the Jewish customs, he made haste to change, and to embrace them entirely; and as he supposed that he could not he thoroughly a Jew unless he were circumcised, he was ready to have it done. But when his mother understood what he was about, she endeavored to hinder him from doing it, and said to him that this thing would bring him into danger; and that, as he was a king, he would thereby bring himself into great odium among his subjects, when they should understand that he was so fond of rites that were to them strange and foreign; and that they would never bear to be ruled over by a Jew. This it was that she said to him, and for the present persuaded him to forbear. And when he had related what she had said to Ananias, he confirmed what his mother had said; and when he had also threatened to leave him, unless he complied with him, he went away from him, and said that he was afraid lest such an action being once become public to all, he should himself be in danger of punishment for having been the occasion of it, and having been the king's instructor in actions that were of ill reputation; and he said that he might worship God without being circumcised, even though he did resolve to follow the Jewish law entirely, which worship of God was of a superior nature to circumcision. He added, that God would forgive him, though he did not perform the operation, while it was omitted out of necessity, and for fear of his subjects. So the king at that time complied with these persuasions of Ananias. 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; for as he entered into his palace to salute him, and found him reading the law of Moses, he said to him, "Thou dost not consider, O king! that thou unjustly breakest the principal of those laws, and art injurious to God himself, [by omitting to be circumcised]; for thou oughtest not only to read them, but chiefly to practice what they enjoin thee. How long wilt thou continue uncircumcised? But if thou hast not yet read the law about circumcision, and dost not know how great impiety thou art guilty of by neglecting it, read it now." When the king had heard what he said, he delayed the thing no longer, but retired to another room, and sent for a surgeon, and did what he was commanded to do. He then sent for his mother, and Ananias his tutor, and informed them that he had done the thing; upon which they were presently struck with astonishment and fear, and that to a great degree, lest the thing should be openly discovered and censured, and the king should hazard the loss of his kingdom, while his subjects would not bear to be governed by a man who was so zealous in another religion; and lest they should themselves run some hazard, because they would be supposed the occasion of his so doing. But it was God himself who hindered what they feared from taking effect; for he preserved both Izates himself and his sons when they fell into many dangers, and procured their deliverance when it seemed to be impossible, and demonstrated thereby that the fruit of piety does not perish as to those that have regard to him, and fix their faith upon him only. (4) But these events we shall relate hereafter.
5. But as to Helena, the king's mother, when she saw that the affairs of Izates's kingdom were in peace, and that her son was a happy man, and admired among all men, and even among foreigners, by the means of God's providence over him, she had a mind to go to the city of Jerusalem, in order to worship at that temple of God which was so very famous among all men, and to offer her thank-offerings there. So she desired her son to give her leave to go thither; upon which he gave his consent to what she desired very willingly, and made great preparations for her dismission, and gave her a great deal of money, and she went down to the city Jerusalem, her son conducting her on her journey a great way. Now her coming was of very great advantage to the people of Jerusalem; for whereas a famine did oppress them at that time, and many people died for want of what was necessary to procure food withal, queen Helena sent some of her servants to Alexandria with money to buy a great quantity of corn, and others of them to Cyprus, to bring a cargo of dried figs. And as soon as they were come back, and had brought those provisions, which was done very quickly, she distributed food to those that were in want of it, and left a most excellent memorial behind her of this benefaction, which she bestowed on our whole nation. And when her son Izates was informed of this famine, (5) he sent great sums of money to the principal men in Jerusalem. However, what favors this queen and king conferred upon our city Jerusalem shall be further related hereafter.
 
Last edited:

Seeker

Well-Known Member
According to Charles N. Pope of the "Domain of Man" site, "Jesus" never became Emperor of Rome either, but as the hidden Great King of the World in the East, he "allowed" his brother Vespasian to become that. Apparently Jesus did spend some time in Britain as Bran the Blessed, according to Pope. Julius Caesar had been the Great King of the World in the East, as a male line descendant of Great King Alexander the Great (explaining why Julius is recorded as wanting to emulate him as a young man), who passed this throne on to his secretly surviving son Caesarion (Augustus was given Rome as a consolation prize), and then Caesarion passed it on to his son Jesus. This elite family had members who would publicly "lose", and also "die" and be "resurrected", becoming other rulers in other lands, if one believes Pope. It was all a part of their "great game", far above the comprehension of the "sheep".
 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
That does appear to be the same general model as revealed in Jupiter Ascending IMO.

Technological and social innovations make various forms of 'resurrection' rather difficult these days, even if plastic surgery is resorted to.
 

Seeker

Well-Known Member
Technological and social innovations make various forms of 'resurrection' rather difficult these days, even if plastic surgery is resorted to.
Yes, just look at what happened now to the former King of Spain, a descendant and member of the elite family of Julius Caesar, Cleopatra and Christ (though of course he does not publicly admit that), Juan Carlos: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/03/world/europe/juan-carlos-leaves-spain.html Of course, one might ask, was this public disgrace and self-exile meant to eventually have him wind up in a "Hidden Resort"?
Charles Pope had told me in 2017 (while he still had a public email address), that he did not know if there was a "Great King (or Queen) of the World" today, as things had changed since the conclusion of WW2. For a long time I thought that it might now be a member of the Habsburg family, as they are heirs to both the Western and Eastern Roman Empires (not to mention Kings of Jerusalem and several other kingdoms), but now I am wondering if it might be one of their ancestors, as silly as that seems on the surface. Pope Paul III (1468-1549) was a paternal Farnese and a maternal Caetani/Orsini, the latter families said to be descended from the Imperial Julio-Claudian dynasty. He established the Jesuits into the Church in 1540, and was believed to have possessed the Philosopher's Stone, with the gift of immortality. He supposedly is hidden and worshiped in Rome today :eek: !!!
 
Last edited:

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
What about the Italian Savoys, who were exiled for their association with the Fascists, and now resurrected? They also own the infamous Shroud of Turin (just a camera obscura photo of Leonardo's head double-exposed onto the body of a corpse).
 

Seeker

Well-Known Member
Just from memory right now, my "understanding (?)" is that the Savoys still really rule Italy, and are very important players in this elite family, just as the Bourbon family of the also disgraced Juan Carlos is, but they are not one of the top five Elite Ptolemaic (includes Cleopatra who "married" Julius Caesar) Papal Bloodlines, i.e., Orsini, Aldobrandini (David Rothschild married a Princess of this family), Breakspear (birth name of Pope Adrian IV, the only English Pope), Somaglia, and Farnese. These Five are the Grey (Pope) Jesuit Council, the Arcana Arcanorum, who worship the immortal Pope Paul III today in Rome. As weird as all of this sounds, I know, perhaps the Elite families have been doing some "weeding out" of the wheat from the chaff since WW2, in light of all of the advances going on in technology (including transhumanism/ immortality?), to keep the identity of the chosen few at the top a continual secret even today?
Just found this, excerpt of an article written by "The Republic Army"(?), Sept. 30, 2014, it mentions the infighting among junior elite families Savoy and Bourbon, and of course the Habsburgs also claim to be the "Kings of Jerusalem" (there is also infighting among the House of Savoy itself, between Prince Vittorio Emanuele and his 3rd cousin, Prince Amedeo, for the Headship of the House of Savoy):
The heads of the Illuminati are the Black Nobility of Europe such as the likes of Prince Vittorio Emanuele IV the Prince of Naples a man of extreme power, wealth and a high level member of the Equestrian Order of the Holy Sepulchre of Jerusalem the most powerful of the Papal Orders which controlled all other orders during the crusades and which holds the largest Cardinal membership. I should remind you that Emanuele IV lays claim to the title of the King of Jerusalem challenging the House of Bourbon! Emanuele IV also controls the powerful banking canton of Geneva in Switzerland with his wife of the House of Doria.
 
Last edited:

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
Monobazus sent her bones, as well as those of Izates, his brother, to Jerusalem, and gave order that they should be buried at the pyramids (8) which their mother had erected;
Ellis argued that these pyramid tombs are evidence that these royals of Adiabene (who he also identifies with the Abgarid dynasty of Edessa and Osroene) saw themselves culturally as Egyptian descendants of Cleopatra. He provided an illustration of some "Egypto-Christian" pyramid tombs located in Syria. However, contrary to my confabulated memory, he made no claims that these pyramid tombs actually belonged to Helena or Izates.

769
 

Seeker

Well-Known Member
That does appear to be the same general model as revealed in Jupiter Ascending IMO.
Just as Ellis and Roman Piso agree that Cleopatra to Christ were all part of one elite royal family, so does Charles N. Pope, on his "Domain of Man" site, agree about one family above all:
"Vespasian and Josephus would have been no strangers. In fact, Josephus could not have been adopted as a Flavian if he wasn't already closely related by blood to the Flavians. There wasn't any difference between Flavians, Pisos, Julio-Claudians, Herodians, etc. They were all closely inter-related, that is, part of one extended royal family. Disregard the business of names and just concentrate on the results. Only then do we perceive how the ancient world operated. Commoners or even equestrians did not rise to become Caesars. Royalty begat royalty. It was a one-way street.
When you view the events described in Josephus as one big "family affair" it does begin to make more sense, if not total sense.
I guess we should call the royal family ardent students of history, if not proper historians. Contrived fulfillment of prophesy and role playing were aspects of royal life that must have been viewed as essential, and as an extension of the overall cult apparatus. The royal family was perpetuated through their adherence to tradition, even if they no longer believed in the sanctity of playing divine roles. In the ancient world, "innovation" was generally considered something evil, because it implied rebellion against royal authority.
The system of typecasting provided the structure, the rules of the game, so to speak, that each member of the royal family had to work with. It was not possible to lie and cheat that system too much. There was only so much that other members of the family would tolerate. You could fool the common people all of the time, but other royal people only some of the time."
 

Seeker

Well-Known Member
And so, this Izates, at least, dies before the war.
Either Josephus or Ellis are performing some sleight of hand here, because Ellis, in his "Jesus, King of Edessa", explains that the Izates who passed away before the war was "Izates I" (also known as James, the brother of Jesus), and that "Izates II" (Jesus) succeeded him, and was sent to Rome, and then to Britain, after surviving the First Jewish War.
 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
Yes, we need to review that. I remember Ellis talking about these brothers.

Check out the following from War 7 Chapter 5. Titus has come north from Caesara where he has killed thousands of Jews celebrating Domitian's birthday. The people of Antioch had previously gotten worked up against the local Jews because the son of the Antioch Jews, named Antiochus, had accused them of getting ready to kill all the Gentiles of Antioch.

There is dome controversy over the location of Zeugma on the Euphrates, however one theory has it being within the region of today's Sanliurfa province. Sanliurfa is today's Edessa. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seleucia_at_the_Zeugma

Victorius Titus is making nice with everyone in the region of Edessa, including the Parthian king, and the local Jews of Antioch at least.


2. But when the people of Antioch were informed that Titus was approaching, they were so glad at it, that they could not keep within their walls, but hasted away to give him the meeting; nay, they proceeded as far as thirty furlongs, and more, with that intention. These were not the men only, but a multitude of women also with their children did the same; and when they saw him coming up to them, they stood on both sides of the way, and stretched out their right hands, saluting him, and making all sorts of acclamations to him, and turned back together with him. They also, among all the acclamations they made to him, besought him all the way they went to eject the Jews out of their city; yet did not Titus at all yield to this their petition, but gave them the bare hearing of it quietly. However, the Jews were in a great deal of terrible fear, under the uncertainty they were in what his opinion was, and what he would do to them. For Titus did not stay at Antioch, but continued his progress immediately to Zeugma, which lies upon the Euphrates, whither came to him messengers from Vologeses king of Parthia, and brought him a crown of gold upon the victory he had gained over the Jews; which he accepted of, and feasted the king's messengers, and then came back to Antioch. And when the senate and people of Antioch earnestly entreated him to come upon their theater, where their whole multitude was assembled, and expected him, he complied with great humanity; but when they pressed him with much earnestness, and continually begged of him that he would eject the Jews out of their city, he gave them this very pertinent answer: How can this be done, since that country of theirs, whither the Jews must be obliged then to retire, is destroyed, and no place will receive them besides?" Whereupon the people of Antioch, when they had failed of success in this their first request, made him a second; for they desired that he would order those tables of brass to be removed on which the Jews' privileges were engraven. However, Titus would not grant that neither, but permitted the Jews of Antioch to continue to enjoy the very same privileges in that city which they had before, and then departed for Egypt; and as he came to Jerusalem in his progress, and compared the melancholy condition he saw it then in, with the ancient glory of the city, and called to mind the greatness of its present ruins, as well as its ancient splendor, he could not but pity the destruction of the city, so far was he from boasting that so great and goodly a city as that was had been by him taken by force; nay, he frequently cursed those that had been the authors of their revolt, and had brought such a punishment upon the city; insomuch that it openly appeared that he did not desire that such a calamity as this punishment of theirs amounted to should be a demonstration of his courage. Yet was there no small quantity of the riches that had been in that city still found among its ruins, a great deal of which the Romans dug up; but the greatest part was discovered by those who were captives, and so they carried it away; I mean the gold and the silver, and the rest of that most precious furniture which the Jews had, and which the owners had treasured up under ground, against the uncertain fortunes of war.
...
4. Now all the soldiery marched out beforehand by companies, and in their several ranks, under their several commanders, in the night time, and were about the gates, not of the upper palaces, but those near the temple of Isis; for there it was that the emperors had rested the foregoing night. And as soon as ever it was day, Vespasian and Titus came out crowned with laurel, and clothed in those ancient purple habits which were proper to their family, and then went as far as Octavian's Walks; for there it was that the senate, and the principal rulers, and those that had been recorded as of the equestrian order, waited for them. Now a tribunal had been erected before the cloisters, and ivory chairs had been set upon it, when they came and sat down upon them. Whereupon the soldiery made an acclamation of joy to them immediately, and all gave them attestations of their valor; while they were themselves without their arms, and only in their silken garments, and crowned with laurel: then Vespasian accepted of these shouts of theirs; but while they were still disposed to go on in such acclamations, he gave them a signal of silence. And when every body entirely held their peace, he stood up, and covering the greatest part of his head with his cloak, he put up the accustomed solemn prayers; the like prayers did Titus put up also; after which prayers Vespasian made a short speech to all the people, and then sent away the soldiers to a dinner prepared for them by the emperors. Then did he retire to that gate which was called the Gate of the Pomp, because pompous shows do always go through that gate; there it was that they tasted some food, and when they had put on their triumphal garments, and had offered sacrifices to the gods that were placed at the gate, they sent the triumph forward, and marched through the theatres, that they might be the more easily seen by the multitudes.

According to Bartram's thesis, staying overnight in the temple of Isis would be an indicator of a plausible association with Chrestianity and Isis's connection to the Chi-Rho.
 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
The following is from my recent post to the Domain of Man thread:

The above taken from the following, which is interesting in the explanation for the 'pollen bags' and the explanation of how the wasp (vespa - Vespasian) is symbiotic with figs and dates. Thus another complementary explanation for Jesus and the barren fig tree. The Roman 'wasp' had not done Jesus good.
My first understanding of the bible fig story came from analyzing the embedded mythos of the drama that unfolded in Heaven and Earth on 9/11, regarding the myth of Apollo and the raven, the latter being sent for water for the feast, and the raven is delayed after seeing some not yet ripened figs. He waits for the figs to ripen and thus returns too late with the water.

This made me realize that the gospel Jesus gets mad because, taking from Greek mythos, his time is not ripe to ascend to the Earthly throne, but rather the Romans had grafted themselves onto the Root of Jesse in his place. At this point the Romans were generic in identity, but now with the explanation of the wasp and the fig we have the Flavians being pointed to. Both Vespasian and Titus employed this vespa aspect in their names.

Our resident entymologist, Seeker, has pointed out on the other thread, that if cicadas may have been thought of as a type of locust (or kamza), then the Ellis identification of the Edessan royal father and son as the Talmud's Kamza and bar Kamza (as those responsible for the starting of the war) becomes even more deep in context.


Sixteen other cicada-killer wasp species in the genus Sphecius are found in Europe, the Middle East, Africa and Asia. There are also other genera of cicada-killing wasps (e.g., Liogorytes in South America and Exeirus in Australia) which are the "cicada killers" of their native lands.

Obviously, this explanation is not 'specius', and thus we have another Flavian signature to Roman Provenance Christian Origins in addition to Atwill's and the Flavian Anchor and Fish imperial iconography detailed by Valliant and Fahy.

Such an explanation is a problem for those who, per convention, cannot conceive of mixed cultural metaphors, but if one elite clan runs all the various Abrahamic 'shows' this is not a problem. Such mixing makes it part of the 'fun' of encrypting and more difficult for those who are culturally compelled to honor convention.
 
Last edited:

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
The following is an interesting Sepher video 'centering' on Troy. It discusses:

  • more of the claims that the Mycenaean Greeks originated in Egypt
  • the 'ruddy' Etruscans and the like being descended (literally or metaphorically?) from Abraham (perhaps the basis of the Talmud claiming the Romans as ruddy 'Esau/Edom'?)
  • Josephus mention of the letter (I think the same as the 'Maccabee' letter) linking the Spartans to the Jews
  • similarities between Norse runes and the Phoenician/Canaanite alphabet
  • similarities between Viking boats and Phoenician (and Egyptian as well) boats
  • we're reminded that the works of 'Homer' are put down in writing around the time of the claimed foundations of Rome and the Assyrian/Babylonian 'aggressions' as the 'iron rod of God'
  • as in several other of his videos, we see a tight association of the 'global' swastika and the so-called Star of David (see below, from here.)

Given all these otherwise unexpected linkages, are we looking at the vectors and evidence of what we have labelled the False Dialectic of Western Civilization? And can we gain some insights into the real agendas of Zionism and Nazism (the supposed and apparent 'breakaway civilization') ... given the former's boost from the Nazi experiance in the foundations of modern Israel?

Based upon this video and a few others, perhaps I should not have discounted the 'Viking' vector into the Normans, as coming mainly or only from a more direct line back to Rome. The 'Scandinavian' Rus and the Anglo-Saxon Saka/Scythians might indeed be deeper players than random 'pagan' bystanders.

783

784
 

Seeker

Well-Known Member
perhaps I should not have discounted the 'Viking' vector into the Normans, as coming mainly or only from a more direct line back to Rome. The 'Scandinavian' Rus and the Anglo-Saxon Saka/Scythians might indeed be deeper players than random 'pagan' bystanders.
Below, Roman Piso has a pedigree from Arrius Calpurnius Piso to King Harald Sigurdsson of Norway, killed at the battle of Stamford Bridge. Rollo (not shown here), the paternal ancestor of William the Conqueror, also is supposed to connect to this Viking ancestry: https://pisoproject.wordpress.com/viking-roman-ancestry/

As I have mentioned previously, Charles N. Pope has both William the Conqueror and Foulques, Count of Anjou, King of Jerusalem, and ancestor of the English Plantagenet dynasty, as members of the Byzantine Roman Emperor imperial family, descended directly from the Western Roman Emperors.

From memory, another website by an apocalyptic "prophet", using the alias of "John" (quite appropriate!), has Ingelgar, the male line ancestor of those Foulques Counts of Anjou, as possibly (by onomastics) the son of Inger, a Scandinavian member of the Varangian guard, who married Melissena (Yes, another one of those in this family, very appropriate and intriguing!), and she was related to the imperial Byzantine family, below is their known history: https://www.geni.com/people/Inger-of-the-Varangian-Guard/6000000009395592414

Chronologically also, Ingelgar (born about 845) would fit in quite nicely as another child of Inger (born about 815) and Melissena (born about 825).
 

Claude Badley

Registered Guest
Fascist
While I can certainly agree with you Seeker in that the various royal families of the different kingdoms and empires colluded with one another - as evidenced by the attempts at intermarriage between them - the issue of Izates II (= Jesus of Gamala) being exiled to Britain is a tall order.
Either Josephus or Ellis are performing some sleight of hand here, because Ellis, in his "Jesus, King of Edessa", explains that the Izates who passed away before the war was "Izates I" (also known as James, the brother of Jesus), and that "Izates II" (Jesus) succeeded him, and was sent to Rome, and then to Britain, after surviving the First Jewish War.
That this is even possible I can only accept because of the discovery of Mithraic worship in the Roman Empire, and its distribution. Mithraism was characteristic of Parthia, so was not found in Roman settlements in the eastern Roman Empire, though it did exist in Rome, St. Peters being built upon a Mithraic temple. Where Mithraism flourished in the Roman Empire was in Britain, as discovered post-WW2 in a Roman settlement near Hadrian's Wall.

That Roman soldiers were reassigned to certain areas if they became MIthra-worshippers is not as far as I know attested in Roman literature - though this is now implied in the archaeological findings.

Yours faithfully
Claude
 

Seeker

Well-Known Member
the issue of Izates II (= Jesus of Gamala) being exiled to Britain is a tall order.
In honor of August 19 being the 2006th anniversary of the passing of Emperor Augustus (and "his" month besides), just for today I shall be "Seesar" and you can be "Claud(e)ius":

So, raise the curtain, Claudius, what do YOU think happened to Izates/Jesus then, if not the Ralph Ellis scenario?
 

Seeker

Well-Known Member
Our resident entymologist, Seeker
HaHaHa, I can't even spell that description of me, but in deference to your compliment, perhaps I should change my nom de plume to "Seekada". However, in order to live up to your expectations of me, here's another one for you:

This made me realize that the gospel Jesus gets mad because, taking from Greek mythos, his time is not ripe to ascend to the Earthly throne, but rather the Romans had grafted themselves onto the Root of Jesse in his place.
From Wikipedia, the meaning of the name "Jesse": "Jesse /ˈdʒɛsi/,[1] or Yishai (Hebrew: יִשַׁי‎ – Yišay,[a] in pausa יִשָׁי‎ – Yišāy, meaning "King" or "God exists" or "God's gift"; Syriac: ܐܝܫܝ‎ – Eshai; Greek: Ἰεσσαί – Iessaí; Latin: Issai, Isai, Jesse)". Looks to me that if you "have eyes to see" you can make "KIng/ESHAI/ISAI" out of Jesse, which could mean two things to me, (1) Eshai/Isai (change that a bit to Esau) is (grafted to) Jesse, and also (2) King Isai (Isa, Izates), meaning that the Imperial Flavian Romans grafted themselves upon King Izates/Jesus, taking his place in the scheme of things. Apparently Izates didn't appear to appreciate "God"s" (Rome's) "gift", and cursed his fate as a "chump", instead of holding the "trump" (Sorry, I couldn't resist!).
 

Claude Badley

Registered Guest
Fascist
At the moment deciding on this issue is very difficult for me.
In honor of August 19 being the 2006th anniversary of the passing of Emperor Augustus (and "his" month besides), just for today I shall be "Seesar" and you can be "Claud(e)ius":

So, raise the curtain, Claudius, what do YOU think happened to Izates/Jesus then, if not the Ralph Ellis scenario?
I cannot make a full assessment of Ellis's works since I have only his last book on King Jesus, but have also looked at his many videos to work out the complicated story.

When I saw Joe Atwill's Caesar's Messiah on Amazon I sent the book to my Mandaean friend in Sydney, Carlos (because I was coming to Sydney in two weeks and didn't want to muck up the Amazon delivery address). Less than a week after the book arrived with him he called me enthusiastically about Joe's work so I ordered another book for him since I had originally intended the book for myself. He handed over the first book only reluctantly, but luckily the other book arrived the next day when I had left Sydney.

My point here is that you could immediately see from the references (readily available) that his analysis was correct. When I later listened to Joe on a video about "Elvis Presley was a Mind-Control Slave" I was expecting rather light entertainment, wondering why Joe would stoop to such a seemingly socio-politically trivial subject. Until he started on the Frankfurt School - which really astounded me! I.e. I could quickly see from his podcasts, videos and interviews, confirming his written work, that he was a person of integrity (which one does not get just from reading a person's book). This is also true for two other well-known Americans I can think of (I know Australians of integrity but they never get much air time so are largely unknown) - Malcolm X and Daniel Everett. Like Joe, they make a few mistakes in their works, but they come to see their errors and correct them.

Unfortunately, I cannot be convinced of the integrity of Ralph Ellis.* His videos are not interviews but measured expositions. The storyline he puts forward may indeed be true, but in the last text, King Jesus, his references are scanty - but perhaps it is different in the earlier works. His material is very interesting there since it deals with Edessa and the god Baalshamin there. Baalshamin is the prototype for the Mandaean demiurge Yushamin, indicating a mysterious Mandaean connection to Edessa.

Ellis has made no mention of Mandaeans, but the Mandaean text, the Haran Gawaita, mentions how Ardban (the Parthian King Artaban II, contemporary of Tiberius) protected the Mandaeans in that "there was no access for the Jews". Ellis's point about the Jewish kings in Parthia, associated with Vorones (?) who was later pushed out towards Edessa seems to be correct, but to link this with a roundabout ancestry from Julius Caesar via Cleopatra to Thea Musa Ourania is complicated.

The latter, presumably now disguised as a handmaid - in order to survive Augustus' wrath at any Cleopatran descendants - is then, in disguise, married off to the Parthian king. Josephus certainly describes great Jewish influence in Parthia at the time, undoubtedly true given that Judaism was winning converts everywhere in the 1st century (BCE & AD), but for Izates to undertake the capture of Jerusalem in order to make it a base for conquering all of Rome is an extraordinary step to take - particularly if it was NOT backed by the Parthians.

The Parthians well knew that the Roman Empire was bigger than their own, occupying Judaea only under Antigonus when the Civil War broke out after JC's death in 44BCE. My own study (in ARAM volume 25) led me to see that the Parthians certainly had designs on capturing Rome via Terentius Maximus about 79AD, since he resembled Nero physically (though who the hell would want Nero back!???); I suspect that they funded him through coins of that era labelled 'Artaban', named after the famous king earlier that century thus issued in Parthia - but only detailed studies of those coins will reveal the smelting site appropriately and help date them better. See Debevoise's history for the outlines.

So what I find improbable in Ellis's claim is that a small kingdom like Edessa-falsely-called-Adiabene could aspire to overthrow both the Roman regime in Italy (as opposed to throwing Rome out of Judaea) and replace its Judaeo-Claudian emperor by someone with an odd ancestral tree involving BOTH Julius Caesar and Jews as well as Parthian nobility.

Yours faithfully
Claude

*Carlos was not either, since Ellis's references were scanty, the subject more pressing for him as a Mandaean. The Mandaeans are the sole surviving Gnostics, their literature bearing a mysterious connection to the seven Apostle Thomas texts! o_O

[Moderator note: off-topic digression moved elsewhere.]
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
So what I find improbable in Ellis's claim is that a small kingdom like Edessa-falsely-called-Adiabene could aspire to overthrow both the Roman regime in Italy (as opposed to throwing Rome out of Judaea) and replace its Judaeo-Claudian emperor by someone with an odd ancestral tree involving BOTH Julius Caesar and Jews as well as Parthian nobility.
"This" .... is what you find fault with? And the fact that King Jesus only provided 11.5 pages of references?

While you, born into the cryptoRoman tradition of Brutus' Tudor London, find it odd that an individual supposedly born with Christ Julius and Isis Cleopatra's blood might dare to challenge for the seat of Rome, supposedly no less than the same Cleopatra thought her son Caesarion was worthy of such, and the Roman aristocrats, including Octavian, were fearful of just this.

Not too much later Rome ends up with its so-called Syrian dynasty of emperors, the Severans. These, running around with their magic meteor, likely once part of the Benben stone and the Phoenix legend (memorialized by the heraldry of much of Europe, including imperial Germany and Russia). And, the Severan rebuilding of the Cosmic Vagina Building at the Dewa Victrix Fortess, first built by Vespasian. I suspect that it was intended that the Cosmic Vagina was to be inseminated with the magic meteor, but maybe the time was not ripe? Still no figs perhaps?

If you had been reading this thread and Chrest to Christ, you'd be aware that I have taken a slightly different interpretation than Ellis. Namely, that the Edessan/Adiabene royal house was either acting wittingly in concert with Rome, as controlled opposition, or had been misled (as was Saddam Hussein with April Glaspie). The latter being the best fit with why Jesus got mad at the barren fig tree, foiled by the seminal ommission of the lowly Sabine wasps. No honor amongst such Abrahamic thieves and locusts. Or, as we've been discussing elsewhere, just part of the transnational elite family business as scripted out (so as to further delude the rubes, the culture babies)?

In any case, Ellis makes a great case that the exiled queen of Parthia and her sonband [sic] became heirs to the lands east of Palestine, promised tax free in exchange for providing armed protection against the Parthians. As usual, when such as the Bible, or Josephus, don't reveal names that one is to pay close attention. It is within this swath of land extending north from Bethanya to east Syria that explains much, such as the strong influence of Aramaic (over Hebrew), and the later strong Templar/Crusader interest in Edessa.

As to not mentioning the Mandaeans, I wonder what you and your friend have been smoking? But thanks for making me review it, as on page 334 Ellis mentions possible Mandaean name and apparel linkage from the court of Akhenaton. Jerry and I have long discussed the likelihood of ether Akhy himself or court members going into exile with his Mittani ancestral family, from just this very region. And, ... so in this sense, just as we know your Zionazi friends originated in royal Egypt (and later theologically from Zorastrian controlled Babylon) the Edessan royal family can also be considered odd 'Nazarene' Jews of sorts, as with their Mandaean cousins. The Edessans, also being massively Hellenized, would have been very accepting of the Zodiac aspects (besides religious also considered the cutting edge science of the day) such as found in the synagogues of Galilee.

Lots of Sabeans running around in different directions like locusts with their Baptist heads chopped off.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Top