Was Julius Caesar the real Jesus Christ?

Prometeo said:
A little bit of emotional baggage there and being reactive. I don't know what you did understand, but the central point to my response to you, is that a corrupt government does not need comets to manipulate their citizens, and that history repeats itself.

Of course, if some catastrophic event is going on at the same time, it may help them.

WIN 52 said:
There is talk about EMT blasts that will wipe out all communication systems. You can see it now, but what will the world do when finding food becomes the main focus and there is no communication available?

You see, it takes quite an orchestration of workers to keep these communication lines working. Think about what if they fail. In a recent article on SOTT it was pointed out that 90% of the US citizens would not survive a year, if the communication, transport and economy fails. Without marketing ability most producers(corporate farms for one) would stop production. How would people feed themselves if the wheels stopped turning?

:rolleyes: yes I already know that, Laura talks about it in the first 100 pages of the secret history book, and pretty much gives a good description of what happens if technology fails. And I guess is "EMP blast", I can't find any related to EMT blasts.

If the cs' pointed out 90% of US citizens wont's survive I don't know what it has to do with caesar, and the corruption of his image.

I think the point is that it is much easier to the PTB to rewrite history when the population is reduced, traumatized, and when the previous societal, intellectual and spiritual landmarks are lost or being doubted because of the catastrophic events. A situation of chaos is the best opportunity for the PTB to remodel a society, something like the shock therapy to the power 100.
 
Yes I agree with that. Being shocked, like the product of the actual campaign of terror that is going on, plus having few ways to communicate with others, it helps the ptb a lot.
 
Prometeo said:
A little bit of emotional baggage there and being reactive. I don't know what you did understand, but the central point to my response to you, is that a corrupt government does not need comets to manipulate their citizens, and that history repeats itself.

Wrong assumption!

You possibly are reading emotional baggage but how can you judge without knowing a person's motivation?(The way this world works, too many judges. This makes it easy to burn witches at the stake.)
 
[quote author=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mithraic_mysteries#cite_note-112]C.M.Daniels, "The role of the Roman army in the spread and practice of Mithraism" in John R. Hinnells (ed) Mithraic Studies: proceedings of the first International congress of Mithraic Studies Manchester university press (1975), vol. 2, p. 250: "Traditionally there are two geographical regions where Mithraism first struck root in the Roman empire: Italy and the Danube. Italy I propose to omit, as the subject needs considerable discussion, and the introduction of the cult there, as witnessed by its early dedicators, seems not to have been military. Before we turn to the Danube, however, there is one early event (rather than geographical location) which should perhaps be mentioned briefly in passing. This is the supposed arrival of the cult in Italy as a result of Pompey the Great's defeat of the Cilician pirates, who practised 'strange sacrifices of their own ... and celebrated certain secret rites, amongst which those of Mithra continue to the present time, having been first instituted by them'. Suffice it to say that there is neither archaeological nor allied evidence for the arrival of Mithraism in the West at that time, nor is there any ancient literary reference, either contemporary or later. If anything, Plutarch's mention carefully omits making the point that the cult was introduced into Italy at that time or by the pirates."[/quote]
Huh?
 
Muxel said:
Suffice it to say that there is neither archaeological nor allied evidence for the arrival of Mithraism in the West at that time, nor is there any ancient literary reference, either contemporary or later. If anything, Plutarch's mention carefully omits making the point that the cult was introduced into Italy at that time or by the pirates."
Huh?

Exactly the problem. There is a big cover-up going on here and I'm gonna get to the bottom of it.
 
This paper emphasizes the fact that many members of the cult were of the lower socio-economic status:

http://www.hums.canterbury.ac.nz/clas/ejms/papers/Volume4Papers/volken_mithras_socio_archaeological_04.pdf

That would suggest that it was a Caesarian project because those are the people who concerned him most.
 
One of the things that has been exercising me is why the "god" of this obviously very Roman cult was called Mithras.

It occurs to me that it might have been due to the fact that Mithridates of Pontus was one of the first - and most effective - rebels against the empire. So, I started looking at all of the various Mithridates and here is what I found:

Mithridates I Ctistes (in Greek Mιθριδάτης Kτίστης; reigned 281–266 BCE) was the founder (this is the meaning of the word Ctistes, literally Builder) of the kingdom of Pontus in Anatolia. ... At a subsequent period, Mithridates is found acquiring support from the Gauls (who later settled in Asia Minor) in order to overthrow a force sent against him by Ptolemy, king of Egypt. ... his reign, which lasted for thirty-six years.


Mithridates II (in Greek Mιθριδάτης; lived 3rd century BC), third king of Pontus and son of Ariobarzanes, whom he succeeded on the throne. ... his kingdom was invaded by the Gauls, who were eventually repulsed... he married Laodice, a sister of Seleucus II Callinicus, with whom he is said to have received the province of Phrygia as a dowry. But notwithstanding this alliance, we find Mithridates II fighting against Seleucus during a war between Seleucus and Antiochus Hierax. Eventually, Mithridates defeated Seleucus in a great battle at Ancyra in 239 BC whereby Seleucus lost twenty thousand of his troops and narrowly escaped with his own life. In 222 BC, Mithridates gave his daughter Laodice in marriage to the Seleucid king Antiochus III: another of his daughters, also named Laodice, was married about the same time to Achaeus, the cousin of Antiochus. In 220 BC, Mithridates declared war upon the wealthy and powerful city of Sinope. {Remember the Cynic, Diogenes of Sinope?} However, he was unable to weaken it and the city did not fall ... At an earlier period, we find Mithridates II vying with the other monarchs of Asia in sending magnificent presents to the Rhodians, after the subversion of their city by an earthquake in 227 BC. {So he would be rememberd in Rhodes, where Posidonius settled later, as a benefactor.}

Mithridates III (Greek: Mιθριδάτης) was the fourth King of Pontus, son of Mithridates II of Pontus and Laodice. Mithridates had two sisters who were Laodice III the first wife of the Seleucid King Antiochus III the Great and Laodice of Pontus. He may have ruled in an uncertain period between 220 BC and 183 BC. Nothing is known of him since the years just cited, because the kingdom of Pontus disappears from history. His same existence is contested by certain historians, even if it is necessary to account for Appian's indication of Mithridates VI of Pontus as the eighth king of the dynasty and the sixth of the name.

Mithridates IV of Pontus or known by his full name Mithridates Philopator Philadelphus[1] (Greek: Mιθριδάτης ὁ Φιλoπάτωρ Φιλάδελφoς, which means "Mithridates the father-loving, brother-loving"; flourished 2nd century BC, died ca. 150 BC) was a prince and sixth King of the Kingdom of Pontus. ... we first hear of him as ruler in 154 BC, when he is mentioned as sending an auxiliary force to the assistance of King of Pergamon, Attalus II Philadelphus, against the King of Bithynia, Prusias II. This moment was an important event, since it signalled the start of a policy of friendship of the Kingdom of Pontus with the Roman Republic and her allies which would continue till Mithridates VI Eupator. ... he married as his Queen his sister Laodice as his wife. {An unusual custom common to the Egyptian 18th dynasty. Possibly evidence that something strange was going on at the time and the "purity of the bloodline" was an issue.}

{Here we see a possibility of some comet imagery coming in} An example of a coin that Mithridates IV honors his Persian origins was choosing a reverse type of Perseus. ... Perseus is standing facing wearing a chlamys, pointed curved helmet and winged boots. In his left hand, he holds the harp and his right hand holding the head of Medusa. The star and crescent are also present with his full name. The obverse had a portrait of him alone. {The Perseus imagery is notable in Mithraism and we recall that there was a cult of Perseus at Tarsus, in Cilicia.}

Another coin: The coin is on one side is a draped bust of Mithridates IV and Laodice. On the reverse side, shows their royal titles in Greek ΒΑΣΙΛΕΩΣ ΜΙΘΡΑΔΑΤΟΥ ΚΑΙ ΒΑΣΙΛΙΣΣΗΣ ΛΑΟΔΙΚΗΣ ΦΙΛΑΔΕΛΦΩΝ which means of King Mithridates and Queen Laodice Philadelphoi. Philadelphoi is the plural for the Greek word Philadelphus which means sibling-loving. On the side of their royal titles, presents Mithridates IV and Laodice struck in the image of the Greek Patron Gods Zeus and Hera. Zeus and Hera are standing facing front. Hera is holding a sceptre in the right hand, while Zeus laureate holds a sceptre in his right hand and a thunderbolt in his left hand. {Yup, I'd say something was going on in the skies.}

Mithridates V Euergetes (Greek: Μιθριδάτης ὁ εὐεργέτης, which means "Mithridates the benefactor"; flourished 2nd century BC, reigned 150–120 BC); also known as Mithridates V of Pontus, Mithradates V of Pontus and Mithradates V Euergetes,[1] was a Prince and seventh King of the wealthy Kingdom of Pontus. ... Mithridates V succeeded his paternal aunt Laodice and paternal uncle Mithridates IV of Pontus ....

Mithridates V continued the politics of an alliance with the Roman Republic ... He supported them with some ships and a small auxiliary force during the Third Punic War (149–146 BC)... rendered them useful assistance in the war against King of Pergamon, Eumenes III (131–129 BC). For his services on this occasion Mithridates V was rewarded by the Roman consul Manius Aquillius with the province of Phrygia. However the acts of the Roman consul were rescinded by the Roman Senate on the grounds of bribery, but it appears that he maintained his possession of Phrygia until his death. {One also suspects that there was some antipathy created by this high-handed action of the Roman Oligarchy which had a lot of nerve accusing anybody of bribery!.} Mithridates V also increased the power of the Kingdom of Pontus by the marriage of his eldest child, his daughter Laodice of Cappadocia to King Ariarathes VI of Cappadocia. ...

Mithridates V, was a great benefactor to the Hellenic culture which shows on surviving coinage and honorific inscriptions stating his donations in Athens and Delos and had great veneration in which he kept for the Greek God Apollo. At the Capitoline Museums in Rome, is on a display a bilingual inscription dedication to him. ...Mithridates V was assassinated in about 120 BC in Sinope poisoned by unknown persons at a lavish banquet which he held.

Mithridates VI or Mithradates VI (Greek: Μιθραδάτης),[2] from Old Persian Mithradatha, "gift of Mithra"; 134–63 BC, also known as Mithradates the Great (Megas) and Eupator Dionysius, was king of Pontus and Armenia Minor in northern Anatolia (now Turkey) from about 120–63 BC. Mithridates is remembered as one of the Roman Republic’s most formidable and successful enemies, who engaged three of the prominent generals from the late Roman Republic in the Mithridatic Wars: Lucius Cornelius Sulla, Lucullus and Pompey. He was also the greatest ruler of the Kingdom of Pontus.

His father, Mithridates V was assassinated in about 120 BC in Sinope, poisoned by unknown persons at a lavish banquet which he held. In the will of Mithridates V, he left the Kingdom to the joint rule of Laodice VI, Mithridates and his younger brother, Mithridates Chrestus. Mithridates and his younger brother were both under aged to rule and their mother retained all power as regent.[9] Laodice VI’s regency over Pontus was from 120 BC to 116 BC (even perhaps up to 113 BC) and favored Mithridates Chrestus over Mithridates. During his mother’s regency, he escaped from his mother's plots against him, and went into hiding.

Mithridates emerged from hiding and returned to Pontus between 116 BC and 113 BC and was hailed King. He removed his mother and brother from the throne, imprisoning both, and became the sole ruler of Pontus. Laodice VI died in prison of natural causes. Mithridates Chrestus may have died in prison from natural causes or was tried for treason and was executed on his orders. Mithridates gave both a royal funeral. Mithridates first married his younger sister Laodice, aged 16. He married her to preserve the purity of their bloodline, and to co-rule over Pontus, to ensure the succession to his legitimate children, and to solidify his claim to the throne. ...

Where his ancestors pursued philhellenism as a means of attaining respectability and prestige among the Hellenistic kingdoms, Mithridates VI made use of Hellenism as a political tool. As protector of Greek cities on the Black Sea and in Asia against barbarism, Mithridates VI logically became protector of Greece and Greek culture, and would use this stance in his clashes with Rome. Strabo mentions that Chersonesus buckled under the pressure of the barbarians and asked Mithridates VI to become its protector (7.4.3. c.308). The most impressive symbol of Mithridates VI's approbation with Greece (Athens in particular) appears at Delos: a heroon dedicated to the Pontic king in 102/1 by the Athenian Helianax, a priest of Poseidon Aisios. A dedication at Delos, by Dicaeus, a priest of Sarapis, was made in 94/93 BC on behalf of the Athenians, Romans, and "King Mithridates Eupator Dionysus." Greek styles mixed with Persian elements also abound on official Pontic coins – [Perseus was favored as an intermediary between both worlds, East and West. Certainly influenced by Alexander the Great, Mithridates VI extended his propaganda from "defender" of Greece to the "great liberator" of the Greek world as war with Roman Republic became inevitable. The Romans were easily translated into "barbarians". ...

His campaign for the allegiance of the Greeks was aided in no small part by his enemy Sulla, who allowed his troops to sack the city of Delphi and plunder many of the city's most famous treasures to help finance his military expenses.

When Mithridates VI was at last defeated by Pompey and in danger of capture by Rome, he is alleged to have attempted suicide by poison; this attempt failed, however, because of his immunity to the poison. According to Appian's Roman History, he then requested his Gaul bodyguard and friend, Bituitus, to kill him by the sword.

In his youth, after the assassination of his father Mithridates V in 120 BC, Mithridates is said to have lived in the wilderness for seven years, inuring himself to hardship. While there, and after his accession, he cultivated an immunity to poisons by regularly ingesting sub-lethal doses of the same. He invented a complex 'universal antidote' against poisoning; several versions are described in the literature. Aulus Cornelius Celsus gives one in his De Medicina and names it Antidotum Mithridaticum, whence English mithridate. Pliny the Elder's version comprised 54 ingredients to be placed in a flask and matured for at least two months. After Mithridates' death in 63 BC, many imperial Roman physicians claimed to possess and improve on the original formula, which they touted as Mithradatium. In keeping with most medical practices of his era, Mithridates' anti-poison routines included a religious component; they were supervised by the Agari, a group of Scythian shamans who never left him. Mithridates was reportedly guarded in his sleep by a horse, a bull, and a stag, which would whinny, bellow, and bleat whenever anyone approached the royal bed. {The creatures by the manger??}

In Pliny the Elder's account of famous polyglots, Mithridates could speak the languages of all the twenty-two nations he governed.

First wife, his sister Laodice. They were married from 115/113 BC till about 90 BC. Mithridates with Laodice had various children:
Sons: Mithridates, Arcathius, Machares and Pharnaces II of Pontus
Daughters: Cleopatra of Pontus (sometimes called Cleopatra the Elder to distinguish her from her sister of the same name) and Drypetina (a diminutive form of "Drypetis"). Drypetina was Mithridates VI’s most devoted daughter. Her baby teeth never fell out, so she had a double set of teeth.

Second wife, the Greek Macedonian Noblewoman, Monime. They were married from about 89/88 BC till 72/71 BC. By whom, he had:
Daughter: Athenais, who married King Ariobarzanes II of Cappadocia

Third wife, Greek woman Berenice of Chios, married from 86–72/71 BC

Fourth wife, Greek woman Stratonice of Pontus, married from after 86–63 BC
Son: Xiphares

Fifth wife, unknown

Sixth wife, Caucasian woman Hypsicratea, married from an unknown date to 63 BC

One of his mistresses was the Galatian Celtic Princess Adobogiona. By Adobogiona, Mithridates had two children: a son called Mithridates I of the Bosporus and a daughter called Adobogiona.

His sons born from his concubine were Cyrus, Xerxes, Darius, Ariarathes IX of Cappadocia, Artaphernes, Oxathres, Phoenix (Mithridates’ son by a mistress of Syrian descent) and Exipodras. His daughters born from his concubine were Nysa, Eupatra, Cleopatra the Younger, Mithridates and Orsabaris. Nysa and Mithridates, were engaged to the Egyptian Greek Pharaohs Ptolemy XII Auletes and his brother Ptolemy of Cyprus.

In 63 BC, when the Kingdom of Pontus was annexed by the Roman general Pompey the remaining sisters, wives, mistresses and children of Mithridates VI in Pontus were put to death. Plutarch writing in his lives (Pompey v.45) states that Mithridates' sister and five of his children took part in Pompey's triumphal procession on this return to Rome in 61 BC. {In other words, they were exhibited like wild animals and shamed before being executed.}

Going back for a moment to that interesting Mithridates Chrestus, brother of Mithridates VI, we note:

In 116 BC/115 BC, Chrestus and his brother were honored by the Dionysius, the gymnasiarch on the Greek island of Delos. Another dedication survives in Athens, by a gymnasiarch of statues of Chrestus and his brother to the Greek Patron God Zeus on behalf of Chrestus and his brother apparently in recognition of his aid to sailors and traders. {Pirates?}

Mithra (Avestan:Miϑra, Old Persian: / Miça) is the Zoroastrian angelic divinity (yazata) of covenant and oath. In addition to being the divinity of contracts, Mithra is also a judicial figure, an all-seeing protector of Truth, and the guardian of cattle, the harvest and of The Waters. ... Together with the Vedic common noun mitra, the Avestan common noun miθra derives from proto-Indo-Iranian *mitra, from the root mi- "to bind", with the "tool suffix" -tra- "causing to." Thus, etymologically mitra/miθra means "that which causes binding", preserved in the Avestan word for "covenant, contract, oath".

Mithras is a Greek form of the name of an Indo-European god, Mithra or Mitra (Old Persian, Mica). Roman writers believed that Mithraism came from Persia and that Mithraic iconography represented Persian mythology. Mithraism was once called the Mysteries of Mithras or Mysteries of the Persians.

In Rome, Mithras was a sun god, and, in Persia, he was a god of the morning sun. The Roman Mithras killed the Primeval Bull, mirroring the death of a Primeval Bull in the Persian religion.

The Roman Mithras wore a Phrygian cap. Phrygia was in the Persian empire for 200 years. Modern scholars have traced Mithras in Persian, Mittanian and Indian mythology. The Mitanni gave us the first written reference to Mithras in a treaty with the Hittites. These and much more suggest a continuity of belief from India to Rome in a myth of a sun god killing a bull.
 
Don's know if of interest, but a certain Eudoxus of Cyzicus (not the philosopher Eudoxus of Cnidus) was a navigator known for his trips to India:

Eudoxus of Cyzicus (fl. c. 130 BC) (Greek: Ευδοξος) was a Greek navigator who explored the Arabian Sea for Ptolemy VIII, king of the Hellenistic Ptolemaic dynasty in Egypt

Voyages to India

According to Poseidonius, later reported in Strabo's Geography,[1] the monsoon wind system of the Indian Ocean was first sailed by Eudoxus of Cyzicus in 118 or 116 BC. Poseidonius said a shipwrecked sailor from India had been rescued in the Red Sea and taken to Ptolemy VIII in Alexandria. The unnamed Indian offered to guide Greek navigators to India. Ptolemy appointed Eudoxus of Cyzicus, who made two voyages from Egypt to India. The first, in 118 BC, was guided by the Indian sailor. After Eudoxus returned with a cargo of aromatics and precious stones a second voyage was undertaken in 116 BC. Eudoxus navigated the second voyage, sailing without a guide.

Strabo, whose Geography is the main surviving source of the story, was skeptical about its truth. Modern scholarship tends to consider it relatively credible. During the 2nd century BC Greek and Indian ships met to trade at Arabian ports such as Aden (called Eudaemon by the Greeks). Attempts to sail beyond Aden were rare, discouraged, and involved a long and laborious coast-hugging journey. Navigators had long been aware of the monsoon winds. Indian ships used them to sail to Arabia, but no Greek ship had yet done so. For the Greeks to acquire the expertise of an Indian pilot meant the chance to bypass the Arabian ports and establish direct commercial links with India. Whether or not the story told by Poseidonius of a shipwrecked Indian pilot teaching Eudoxus about the monsoon winds is true, Greek ships were in fact soon using the monsoon winds to sail to India. By 50 BC there was a marked increase in the number of Greek and Roman ships sailing the Red Sea to the Indian Ocean.[2]

Another Greek navigator, Hippalus, is sometimes credited with discovering the monsoon wind route to India. He is sometimes conjectured to have been part of Eudoxus's expeditions.[3]
 
Mal7 said:
This book looks to me like quite a good introduction to Julius Caesar:

Julius Caesar: The Colossus of Rome by Richard A. Billows. London: Routledge, 2009.

In the main part of the book, Billows has confined his numerous footnotes to the original classical sources, rather than works by modern historians.

In the Preface, he lists some other modern histories that he thinks are of interest. Parenti's book gets a very favourable mention:

Two very good recent biographies are Adrian Goldsworthy's Caesar: Life of a Colossus (2006) and Luigi Canfora's Julius Caesar: The People's Dictator (1999). To my mind more interesting, though, is a work by a writer who is not a professional scholar and academic, nor even a professional Roman historian: Michael Parenti. His The Assassination of Caesar (2003), though it has errors and misunderstandings, offers much food for thought in Parenti's ability to 'think outside the box' and offer genuinely different interpretations of events and characters. I have read it with great profit.
- Billows, Julius Caesar: The Colossus of Rome, page xii.

This book is available in Spanish:
http://www.casadellibro.com/libro-julio-cesar-el-coloso-de-roma/9788424920036/1840164

Also Parenti's Assassination of Julius Caesar and Freeman's Julius Caesar:

http://www.casadellibro.com/libro-el-asesinato-de-julio-cesar-una-historia-del-pueblo-de-la-antigu-a-roma/9788495786722/1039867

http://www.casadellibro.com/libro-julio-cesar/9788408084457/1247879
 
Laura said:
Exactly the connection I'm seeing.

I think Caesar met with Posidonius on Rhodes and that silly story about the pirates was just a cover. The odd thing is that I noticed some similarities in the story of Clodius as told by Appianus yesterday, including a "capture by pirates", so I think that some of Clodius "legend" was grafted onto Caesar.

Anyway, if Caesar met with Posidonius, if he read Posidonius, if he had a grasp of Stoicism as developed by Posidonius, which would have included the knowledge of cometary bombardment and the then theorized relationship between that and human behavior, then that would explain part of his drive to do what he did. He may have been the "father" in more ways than one. He may have been the "father" in the Mithraic mysteries followed by his soldiers. That may have explained the loyalty and cohesion of his troops.

Caesar had a keen, scientific mind: the mind of a physicist, mathematician, psychologist, engineer, and more. His greatest talent was to instantly take in all the features and variables of a situation and make the most of it. I would suggest that he was doing this on a more global level and literally trying to save humanity from themselves.

The odd thing is that Cato is referred to as the Stoic, but he is the least Stoic of the characters, and Caesar referred to as an epicurean or otherwise, and he was the MOST Stoic.

Cato and Cicero were both disgusting, pusillanimous creatures who probably suffered from some personality disorders and our history has been poisoned by their pathology ever since.

In any event, Caesar's true relationship to Stoicism comes through in some of the "sayings" of the NT that Mack identifies as "Cynic". Carotta shows how many things Caesar was known to say historically, became twisted due to translation, transposition, and later misunderstanding or politically driven edits.

What is interesting is, understanding this model of how a religion can come into being gives us tools for controlling our understanding of how Judaism came into being. I'm inclined to think that it came NOT from Egypt, but from Assyria. There is also a very strong similarity between the ancient Roman "story" and the Jewish "story". Too many correspondences to be just accidental.

What I like to do is just read the evidence, the ancient texts, combine that with the archaeology, and let the facts develop on their own without putting a theory out there first. You have to check the ancient stories against the archaeology FIRST.

Perhaps the idea of ​​the "chosen people" is Roman? I mean, of imperial Rome, in which there was apparently something of a moral right of conquest, by their cultural superiority, of all they could (and the pathological elite of U.S. repeats some of this when they say to bring "freedom and democracy" to the Middle East, for example).
Or maybe the idea of the chosen people is older than Rome and Judaism? If there is anything remotely truthful about it, could be see in the switching of the habitat of the same idea: be ​​"special". Like how some originally political ideas (rational, with the neo-cortex at the helm and more broad perspectives and contexts) to become popular religious ideas (chemical emotions and short-sighted. Reactive to the programming of the thalamus and the amygdala) and what ended up being Judaism and Christianity consolidated. So if there is something true in this, you could still see in action the "law" that the north civilized the south. Like the Greco-Romans was civilized by the people of the north-east.
 
l apprenti de forgeron said:
Perhaps the idea of ​​the "chosen people" is Roman? I mean, of imperial Rome, in which there was apparently something of a moral right of conquest, by their cultural superiority, of all they could (and the pathological elite of U.S. repeats some of this when they say to bring "freedom and democracy" to the Middle East, for example).

Not only the "chosen people" seems to belong to the Romans, but the "eternal city chosen by the gods" was Rome.

And all this was attributed to the idea that Rome was founded by Romulus and Remus and they were descendants of Aeneas who escaped from burning Troy. Now there's an exodus for you!

l apprenti de forgeron said:
Or maybe the idea of the chosen people is older than Rome and Judaism? If there is anything remotely truthful about it, could be see in the switching of the habitat of the same idea: be ​​"special". Like how some originally political ideas (rational, with the neo-cortex at the helm and more broad perspectives and contexts) to become popular religious ideas (chemical emotions and short-sighted. Reactive to the programming of the thalamus and the amygdala) and what ended up being Judaism and Christianity consolidated. So if there is something true in this, you could still see in action the "law" that the north civilized the south. Like the Greco-Romans was civilized by the people of the north-east.

Yes, that is going in the direction I'm thinking, but I'm still waiting for that clue that sort of locks it in.
 
I went searching around after re-reading a quote I gave in this post: http://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php/topic,31231.msg413049.html#msg413049

Regardless, Zervanism spread throughout the Greek world. Plutarch, who alluded to Mazdaism, presented it in its Zervanist form. This doctrine also left a strong imprint on Mithraism and on those other religions that succeeded it, including Christianity.

And found a line of research that might be worth following.

Traditions of the Magi: Zoroastrianism in Greek and Latin Literature By Albert De Jong

If you google the above book (crazy expensive on amazon) and follow the link to the google book, you can find a mention of the Magusaeans, who relate to Stoicim in some way and Mithraism. Here is a short quote (would quote more, but can’t cut and paste and many words are not readable, so could be worth it just to go to page 11 and 12 of the google book and read it fully):

What is more important is that Bidez and Cumont argued that these Magusaeans, these Hellenized Magi, were responsible for the ____ (unreadable) large amount of pseudo-Zoroastrian literature, and for the spread of Mithraism to the West.

The book that talks about the Magusaeans that this quote is talking about is 'Les Mages Hellenises' by Franz Cumont and Joseph Bidez and might be worth checking out in relation to the origin/spread of Mithraism.

Also found this interesting link that talks about the influence of Mithraism on Christianity.
http://www.cogwriter.com/christianity-mithraism.htm
 
Laura said:
Not only the "chosen people" seems to belong to the Romans, but the "eternal city chosen by the gods" was Rome.

And all this was attributed to the idea that Rome was founded by Romulus and Remus and they were descendants of Aeneas who escaped from burning Troy. Now there's an exodus for you!

Wow!!! Really amazing!!!

Laura said:
l apprenti de forgeron said:
Or maybe the idea of the chosen people is older than Rome and Judaism? If there is anything remotely truthful about it, could be see in the switching of the habitat of the same idea: be ​​"special". Like how some originally political ideas (rational, with the neo-cortex at the helm and more broad perspectives and contexts) to become popular religious ideas (chemical emotions and short-sighted. Reactive to the programming of the thalamus and the amygdala) and what ended up being Judaism and Christianity consolidated. So if there is something true in this, you could still see in action the "law" that the north civilized the south. Like the Greco-Romans was civilized by the people of the north-east.

Yes, that is going in the direction I'm thinking, but I'm still waiting for that clue that sort of locks it in.

With your work and inspiration and the network that you created, you'll get it! :flowers:
 
Missed this website before that has the 'Traditions of the Magi' book viewable online and in PDF, so a person that is interested doesn't have to spend $400 on a hardcopy and can read the info I was referring to.
http://archive.org/details/TraditionsOfTheMagiZoroastrianismInGreekAndLatinLiterature
 
Bear said:
The book that talks about the Magusaeans that this quote is talking about is 'Les Mages Hellenises' by Franz Cumont and Joseph Bidez and might be worth checking out in relation to the origin/spread of Mithraism.

Also found this interesting link that talks about the influence of Mithraism on Christianity.
http://www.cogwriter.com/christianity-mithraism.htm

Most Mithraic scholars nowadays reject Cumont's theories for the most part. I'm just reading everything I can get my hands on to see if any pattern emerges.

I pointed out in the thread about Gurdjieff as a Stoic, that the fact that Gurdjieff's ideas and teachings demonstrate the probable survival of a truly ancient Stoic system for a very, very long time is furiously interesting. And, as I mentioned elsewhere, the fact that this system includes cyclic catastrophes that relate in some way to the behavior of humanity suggests that this, too, was part of the "inner teaching" of Stoicism.

It does seem that it is possible that the Mithraic Mysteries may have been a repository for some of these ideas via its astrological symbolism. What is interesting is that just at the time the worship of Divus Julius disappeared, not one, but TWO religions emerged: The Mysteries of Mithras and Christianity.

Additionally, there is no archaeological evidence for the existence of the Mysteries of Mithras around the time of Caesar, Pompey and the Cilician pirates so one wonders exactly what was Plutarch trying to tell us with that hokey story? Or was he just repeating something from Pollio or others? And if so, what were they really saying? Further, the distribution of Mithraea suggests something that was created/formed in Italy itself, not in the East.

Oh, for a time machine!
 
Back
Top Bottom