Claude Badley

Registered Guest
Fascist
I had misled you on which book I had - it was Jesus King of Edessa, not King Jesus (the previous book) - so the Mandaean reference on p. 334 is not in the former. My apologies...

As you point out, I will have to get his other books, which I don't yet have time to read. Hence when you bring up Ellis's earlier works I am just gonna have to defer to your superior knowledge - and to Seeker's too!

Luckily too Carlos does not smoke at all, but he does know Mandaean traditions and beliefs and realizes that Mandaeism seems to have been founded in Edessa and was a major religious influence before the overthrow of Parthia about 224AD. The Mandaeans identified with the Parthian ruling family - and the legend about the boy-king (allegedly Thomas) in the Hymn of the Pearl from the Acts of Thomas going to the Labyrinth in Egypt has clear Mandaean echoes. So I always HAVE TO concur with some sort of Akhenaten-monotheistic influence.

Yours faithfully
Claude
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
From the opening paragraph of Chapter 3 "He Didn't Mean to Be Crassus" in Pope's Jesus Among the Julio-Claudians we find his take on our old friend Phraates IV, albeit appearing about a generation(?) displaced from Ellis' treatment.

In the year before the Battle of Alesia (and the year after the “death” of Caesar’s daughter Julia), the eldest member of the triumvirate, Crassus, took a dive. It was part of Caesar’s transition to power, not merely in Rome, but as the next head of the royal family and next “incarnation” of Alexander. Crassus took no ordinary dive, but one specifically choreographed after Alexander’s greatest contemporary rival (and putative “Successor”) Seleucus. As part of his own kingly draw-down, Seleucus had first eliminated his primary Western identity, Lysimachus of Thrace. Seleucus was subsequently “killed” by his nominal son Ceraunus.[a] In remembrance of Seleucus, the Western identity of Crassus had to first be killed off by one of his own Eastern identities, Orodes II. Later, Orodes would be “murdered” by one of his “sons,” Phraates IV, who (as we shall see) was fulfilling his own personal typecasting as the new Ceraunus. The leading Romans were exhibiting and reenacting a very privileged understanding of the royal history of Alexander and his “Successors.”

Pope's lens of analysis is similar to Nicholas De Vere's claims that the ruling elites of many or most kingdoms and empires are all one big corporate family, interrelated via marriages and clans, individuals employing different identities as needed. Such explains why the depictions of royals and nobles frequently don't appear the same as the common people of their realms.
 
Last edited:

Seeker

Well-Known Member
From the opening paragraph of Chapter 3 "He Didn't Mean to Be Crassus" in Pope's Jesus Among the Julio-Claudians we find his take on our old friend Phraates IV, albeit appearing about a generation(?) displaced from Ellis' treatment.
So glad you are enjoying his book, Richard.

Mmmm, unless I am missing something, so far I think that we can synchronize the chronology of Ellis and Pope, as Ellis, in his genealogy chart at the back of "Jesus King of Edessa", has Phraates IV living 60-2 BC, with his father Orodes II passing away in 38 BC, well after the "killing" of Crassus in 53 BC.
 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
I think it quite possible to reconcile Ellis with Pope, generally speaking, with the exception being the actual flesh and blood human of the Edessan/Adiabene royal family. Pope even has Phraates IV being inserted into this lineage as does Ellis. And he has Cicero worried about Cleo being pregnant with Caesarion instead of the next whelp or whelpess, who Ellis believes is Thea Muse Ourania whom hilariously would be brother and sister, consistent however with the related pharaonic system.

Pope has the 'dead' Julius appearing at the Battle of Actium as Gnaeus Domitius Ahenobarbus. The last two names work like 'Conquering (or Taming, Domesticating) Bearded Aeneas (or merely Trojan), what better fun crypto-name for Julius Caesar. (My Latin dictionary refers one from ahen- to aen-, the latter which only has entries for either Aeneas, Aenid, or more generically a 'Trojan'). See more after the quote.

As with his role model Alexander the Great, Caesar made a number of “post-resurrection appearances.” Caesar was especially not without a personal presence or agency in Rome. His identity of Caius Claudius Marcellus was still very much in use, and he only relinquished this name in 40 BC in order to allow Marc Antony to marry his wife Octavia Minor (Cleopatra), who was even then pregnant by Antony. P. Volumnius Eutrapelus ("Witty"), master and suitor of Cytheris, was an alias that Julius Caesar used to pique Cleopatra VII and also to loan her out to well-qualified gentlemen. Volumnius is attested in 43 BC, which is after Caesar's death, and because he was continuing to function as Cleopatra’s “handler” (among other things). The identity of Gnaeus Domitius Ahenobarbus also continued and was used by Caesar to stage-manage the Battle of Actium.
The 'Domitius' also working well with what I discovered about 'Domitianus' Nero in The Case of the Fresh Fillet and Crispy Sprats:

In searching for Adiabene (east of the Euphrates or east of the Tigris?) I happened across a translator's note to Antiquities, Chapter XX:
(17) This duration of the reign of Claudius agrees with Dio, as Dr. Hudson here remarks; as he also remarks that Nero's name, which was at first L. Domitius Aenobarbus, after Claudius had adopted him was Nero Claudius Caesar Drusus Germanicus. This Soleus as [own Life, sect. 11, as also] by Dio Cassius and Taeims, as Dr. Hudson informs us.

The same name is employed at Actium as is first given to Nero, whom is later honored by the Jesuit order with their capo as being 'Papa Nero'. Charles Pope, not the Black or White Pope, shows that GDA switches sides from Antony and Cleo to Octavian's side while Antony haplessly concedes. Because it is all scripted.

Pope then goes on to claim that 'dead' Antony becomes King Herod and Phraates IV, which can accommodate Ellis' assertion that Phraates V was offered his 'office' by the Herodians in the buffer zone. Antony being Herod the Great makes sense of the Romans being identifying the Romans as Idumaeans, and also makes great sense of Fortress Antonia, currently hilariously idolized as the Temple Mount and Wailing Wall.

Ellis has Phraates V and his mother-wife killing Phraates IV (Pope's Antony). If Phraates V is really Caesarion, it all works out in Pope's system of surrogate parenting scenarios. The surrogacy is used to fool those outsiders while the literal parentage is maintained for the transnational royal insiders.

Pope will discuss the royal family matters as if they are acting on a global stage, and even asserts that Mark Antony attempts the first known romantic poetry in Latin. It is bemoaning the loss of the authors' lover, apparently Cleo, and one wonders if this was the inspiration for Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet. 'Rome-o' - 'Juliet'?

Pope mentions Augustus last words asking if everybody liked his performance, and I am then reminded of Vespasian's dying joke of becoming a god.
 
Last edited:

Seeker

Well-Known Member
Mark Antony attempts the first known romantic poetry in Latin. It is bemoaning the loss of the authors' lover, apparently Cleo, and one wonders if this was the inspiration for Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet. 'Rome-o' - 'Juliet'?
If Edward de Vere was indeed one of the "Shakespeare" writing team (authors of "Romeo and Juliet"), then according to Nicholas de Vere he would have descended from the Julio-Claudian dynasty of Roman Emperor Claudius, official grandson of Mark Antony and the stepfather of Nero.
 

Seeker

Well-Known Member
The identity of Gnaeus Domitius Ahenobarbus also continued and was used by Caesar to stage-manage the Battle of Actium.The 'Domitius' also working well with what I discovered about 'Domitianus' Nero in The Case of the Fresh Fillet and Crispy Sprats:
Indeed so, as if I am interpreting Charles Pope correctly, Caesar was actually the great-grandfather of Domitian, and Nero was his second cousin, all one Elite family.
If Phraates V is really Caesarion, it all works out in Pope's system of surrogate parenting scenarios.
Yes, we have Phraates V (Ellis version) and Caesarion (Pope version) as the father of Izates/Jesus. In addition, Pope mentions on his site that Caesarion was also King Juba II of Mauretania, father of King Ptolemy of Mauritania, whom as "Pantera", Ellis had originally proposed as an alternate father of Izates/Jesus. Thus, Jesus could ultimately descend from that Mauritanian royal line after all, bringing Ellis and Pope into even more harmony. Juba II claimed to be descended from Hercules, son of Jupiter, just as Alexander the Great, the male line (according to Pope) ancestor of Julius Caesar did (Caesar of course claimed his ancestress was Venus, daughter of Jupiter), showing how much they really were one extended Elite family. Alexander was pronounced the son of Amun at the Oracle of Siwa Oasis in the Libyan desert, and after this often referred to Zeus-Ammon as his true father. Ancient "Libyans" were a designation for the "Berbers", of which Juba II was one. As I mentioned on my "Alternative Genealogy" thread, as Alexander also claimed to be descended from Heracles, son of Zeus, Pope states that "The actual lineage of Alexander came through the Persian royal house, and from there back to the Egyptian pharaohs. He could of course not have literally been a descendant of Heracles, as Heracles had no surviving sons to succeed him. But, that was beside the point. Heracles had been part of the royal family. In fact, Egyptologists refer to Horus the Younger, the Egyptian Heracles, as the first royal person in recorded history." Besides, let us not forget Mark Antony, who, besides his official maternal Caesar descent, claimed to paternally descend from Anton, son of Hercules, son of Jupiter. Was Hercules "code" for Elite royal ancestry?
 
Last edited:

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
In reading Pope it struck me as to the different use of Octavian and Octavius. In searching Wikipedia has a page on him as a character in the HBO/BBC2 TV series Rome. Here the excerpt is from a section comparing the TV character to what has been handed down historically:

In Rome [the TV show - rs], Octavian is called Gaius Octavian and becomes known as Gaius Octavian Caesar after Caesar's death. The real Octavian was known as Gaius Octavius (he only becomes an "Octavianus" after being adopted and becoming a "Julius") and then became known as Gaius Julius Caesar (Octavianus/Octavian by his enemies, including Cicero, who continued to address him as Octavian in order to amuse himself and dent Octavian's ego, and later historians) after posthumously adopted by Caesar. ...

Pope has Augustus as being the actual son of Julius, and because of the royal parenting charade, for public consumption Octavian/Octavius thus has to be 'adopted' by Julius.
 

Seeker

Well-Known Member
Pope has Augustus as being the actual son of Julius, and because of the royal parenting charade, for public consumption Octavian/Octavius thus has to be 'adopted' by Julius.
As you know, we have the months "July" named for Julius and "August" for Augustus. Even though "October" was supposed to be named for what was formerly the eighth (octo) month of the Roman calendar (but later became the tenth), could Augustus have snuck in another month named for him as the formerly "Octavius"? By the way, we still use the Roman names for months, is this telling us something?
Also, I always wondered about his mother Atia getting pregnant in the temple of Apollo, when Julius Caesar was born on the feast of Apollo (more Elite royal family code talk?) That Wikipedia article about Augustus states that Philippus, the stepfather of Octavius, claimed to be descended from Alexander the Great (just as Pope says Julius Caesar was in the male line).
 
Last edited:

Seeker

Well-Known Member
I don't think so, it was recorded that, as part of the calendar fix, only the two were added by Julius, as I remember.
Indeed, the official story is that Quintilis became July for Julius, and Sextilis became August for Augustus, but I just had the whimsical thought that, unofficially, it may have been convenient for people to naturally think "Octavius", when October came around, without officially celebrating it as "his" month too. Maybe I am starting to think too much "Like a Royal"!
 
Last edited:

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
I forgot to add that Pope stated that popular historical writer, Tom Holland, in his Rubicon, allowed that Caesarion must have survived. Pope argues that this is what the Donations of Alexandria were for -- within the overarching royal 'family' network, and therefore it makes little sense that Caesarion was 'disposed' of. Such 'disposals' would act as a disincentive for long term, multigenerational, internal family cooperation.

This is similar to what I have asserted happens for lesser players doing 'dirty deeds' for the family project and thus getting to retire to the 'Hidden Resort'. Under Pope's schema, with the bigger players of yore, and before the mass media, such players 'good' or 'bad' could be fake killed and recycled under a perhaps less visible guise.

Interestingly, there is a theory floating around that Caesarion, aka Alexander Helios, escaped the Old World with ~50K supporters to southern Illinois and the Grand Canyon, where huge cave systems yet hold fabulous wealth and mummies. The caves have been 'discovered' but are mysteriously hidden from our view.
 

Seeker

Well-Known Member
there is a theory floating around that Caesarion, aka Alexander Helios, escaped the Old World with ~50K supporters to southern Illinois and the Grand Canyon, where huge cave systems yet hold fabulous wealth and mummies.
Also, "New Jersey" in Latin is "Nova Caesarea".
 

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
Interestingly, there is a theory floating around that Caesarion, aka Alexander Helios, escaped the Old World with ~50K supporters to southern Illinois and the Grand Canyon, where huge cave systems yet hold fabulous wealth and mummies. The caves have been 'discovered' but are mysteriously hidden from our view.
I am not jumping to any conclusions one way or the other. But, here's a skeptical assessment of this story.

http://www.jasoncolavito.com/blog/review-of-america-unearthed-s02e05-grand-canyon-treasure

Burrows Cave
The so-called Burrows Cave is an “ancient” site that dates all the way back to 1982, when Russell Burrows began hawking artifacts in a faux-Egyptian art style that he claimed to have found in an Illinois cave. When investigators from the Early Sites Research Society tried to pin down the location of the cave and its supposed wonders, they came up empty-handed. Burrows refused to tell anyone where the cave is, despite regularly producing phantasmagorical new “artifacts” in a range of ancient art styles. Thousands of such artifacts appeared, and Burrows asserted that $60 million in gold was buried in the cave, which he worried that the Illinois state government would “steal” from him, prompting him to claim to have dynamited the cave entrance in 1989.
Investigators found evidence that the Burrows Cave hoax had ties to Mormon cult archaeology....
The 'Egyptian' Grand Canyon Cave
The story begins in March of 1909 when on a newspaper called the Arizona Gazette began recording the adventures of an explorer called G. E. Kinkaid. On April 5, 1909 it published under the headline “Explorations in the Grand Canyon” the story of how a Smithsonian scholar named S. A. Jordan and an adventurer named G. E. Kinkaid had found a series of caves in the Grand Canyon stuffed with artifacts of no certain provenance and room for 50,000 (!) people. I have of course placed the full text of the article in my Library.
The article is and remains a hoax, not dissimilar to the great Moon Hoax of 1835, Mark Twain’s Petrified Man hoax of 1862, or, more closely still, the Atlantis hoax of 1912, when William Randolph Hearst’s New American ran a two page “report” about an archaeologist’s discovery of proof of Atlantean influence on ancient cultures worldwide. We’ll look into the characters involved more below, but suffice it to say that 1909 was in the middle of a period of rampant hoaxing, what by some accounts was the heyday of hoaxing....
 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
I watched that episode yesterday, but decided not to post it, since they had no evidence to present ... and it seemed a pretty goofy story all around.
 

Seeker

Well-Known Member
they had no evidence to present
Just as there is no evidence that Caesarion was executed August 23, at the age of 17, in 30 BC, according to Wikipedia. Was he part of the "23/17 phenomenon", written about by Robert Shea and Robert Anton Wilson, in "The Illuminatus! Trilogy"?
 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
Perhaps this thread needs to be renamed, to maybe From the Pyramids to Cleopatra to Christ to De Vere to Harry? See: https://postflaviana.org/community/index.php?threads/the-case-for-de-vere.2589/post-16857

Separately, the following video discusses the possibility to a competing contemporaneous gospel or Christology from that of Paul's. If Paul is teaching a cosmic Christ and Crucifixion, then is the competing Christology that of the Nazarene's based upon a royal human. One whose lineage is later grafted onto? They ponder fruitlessly on what this cosmic Crucifixion might have been, but here we know about the planar intersection of the Earth's Ecliptic with the Galactic Equator, and when the Earth passes through these 'gates'.

The following video discusses a rising academic view that Paul was trying to allow staying within the Judaic milieu, at least for those born into the tradition. They mention the point of the ethnons needing to stay within their 'national' identities, and so the Mosaic Laws can remain a burden upon the Jews. This is the general conclusion that I have reached regarding the disposition raised in Revelation.

 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
The following is interesting to watch in light of Pope's assertion that the 'dead' Marc Antony became Herod the Great. Herod is obsessed with Roman architecture and Greco-Roman culture, he gets along well with Cleo 7, and he makes 3 trips to Rome.

 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
It appears to me that a major advance has been made on the identifications of Paul and Jesus consistent with what we've been discussing on this thread. And, it has the royal house of Edessa/Adiabene aligned with Rome. In doing so it makes sense then that various anti-Rome, anti-(corrupt)Temple Jews are then co-opted into becoming canonic Christians.

The rebel Chrestus is mentioned and here we may be looking at the same phenomenon of co-opting names via the use of 'Chrestian', in addition to 'Chrest' being linked to Mithraism and the Greek word for 'good'.

Near the ending is discussed the Talmud's resurrection of Titus. Why haven't we heard of this before?

 
Last edited:

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
I don't know that this is the best thread to post this, but oh well. The following is a brief video of Dr. Price talking about Lucifer, Jesus, and the Morning Star (aka Venus).

Price tells us the astrotheology of the Morning Star rising before dawn only to be subsumed by the brighter light of the Sun. In this case, Jesus, who claims to be the Morning Star, is Venus and the father YHWH is the Sun. Jesus, apparently has had a sex change operation, unless that is ... he is ... Lucifer. Oh wait, Lucifer is also Venus in that case, and if the KJV identification in Isaiah 14:12 is correct.

How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!

If the Hebrew helel really means shining one as an epithet of the 'fallen' Babylonian king, then this would also apply to Venus and equally to Jesus in either the literal gospel sense or to the Ellis/Berman sense.

In any case, perhaps the gospel Jesus is saying that he is the Morning Star in the sense of being the heralding Alpha and Omega (the Evening Star) of the New Day or Age? And thus Monobazus Izates is subsumed by the Illuminated Light of the Avatar of the Imperial Caesar and Popes? And this is why the Catholic Church acknowledges Jesus as the Bringer of Light.


 
Last edited:
Top