Was Julius Caesar the real Jesus Christ?

Well this may get very interesting. When I first read the title of this post, what flashed into my head about Julius Caesar was a kind of violent general first, and then a sort of dictator.

from Wikipedia said:
[...] Much of Caesar's life is known from his own accounts of his military campaigns, and from other contemporary sources, mainly the letters and speeches of Cicero and the historical writings of Sallust. The later biographies of Caesar by Suetonius and Plutarch are also major sources. Caesar is deemed to be one of the greatest military commanders in history...

Jesus, "meek and mild" Christ, vs Julius, bad guy/warlike Caesar -

So, being not very well-read about this period in history. (finished HOM though), I am probably an example of what comes to most peoples' minds when they think of J. Caesar. A bit of learning/unlearning about this subject might be fun and act as a sort of catalyst.

from 950105 said:
Q: (L) What was Jesus actual name?
A: Jesinavarah.

from 941005 said:
Q: (L) I would like more details about the man you say is the biological father of Jesus. Once again, what is his name?
A: Tonatha.
Q: (L) You said he was an acquaintance of Mary's?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) Was he selected for some reason to be the biological father of Jesus by other beings or powers.
A: Close.
Q: (L) Can you give us any details about him. What was his lineage, where did he come from, etc.
A: He was a member of the white sect.
Q: (L) What is the white sect?
A: AKA Aryans. Andarans. (Laura's note: Who are the Andarans?)
Q: (L) Was Mary a member of the Essene group?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) Was this man also a member of the Essenes?
A: No.
Q: (L) This person, Tonatha, was chosen to be the biological father of Jesus?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) Why did Mary not marry him?
A: Feelings were extremely transient.
Q: (L) You are saying she was fickle?
A: No. Influenced by telepathic suggestion.
Q: (L) Was she already betrothed at this time?
A: No. Hypnotized level 1.

Both of the above C's quotes are from this thread:

http://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php/topic,1082.15.html - It's been awhile since I've read or thought
about that session.

Being confused is not such a bad thing sometimes I guess, I gotta read some more about this...
dant said:
Just a side note: The Catholic Church is actually "Roman Catholic Church"
which speaks for itself?

According to mainstream history, "Catholic Church" is actually "two". The original split led to the creation of the Roman Catholics. In those sources, what was split away from is now referred to as "The Orthodox Church."

The Orthodox Church is also said by some people to be the one which retained original texts that Gurdjieff studied for their "depth psychology." Even today, some Orthodox Churches will let you read their old texts in their library with a "guide" present to assist you in your reading. Different reasons are given for this, but some students are told its due to the difference between being indoctrinated and arriving at truths yourself. The guides supposedly help keep the student from going off on tangents.

Personally, I have yet to experience this, but I have a couple of acquaintances who have experienced both versions of Catholicism and tend to agree with the above.
Bluelamp said:
I once did a search on Gaul and Galilee (and later gaul isle lee via something) based on the transcript with this connection mentioned as a comment and the Carotta summary page was one of the results. Sounded related to the mythologization in general but I didn't think JC was JC other than in a composite character way. WOW. Besides the name (discussed earlier), the date of birth didn't seem connected with what the Cs said.

Maybe the date of birth is the date of the creation of the story that removed Caesar from the picture. Read Carotta's paper linked in my first post: "The Gospels as Diegetic Transpositions: A Possible Solution to the Aporia 'Did Jesus Exist?'"
Also, read Plutarch's "Parallel Lives" and Sallust's "Jughertine War" and "Catalinian Conspiracy". Read Dio Cassius, Varro, and Cicero. Cicero was a pompous ass, an authoritarian follower who had the morals of a weathervane couched as paramoralisms. I tell ya, reading all this stuff with Ponerology in mind is fascinating.
Laura said:
Cicero was a pompous ass, an authoritarian follower who had the morals of a weathervane couched as paramoralisms.

Hah! I have sooo got to borrow this!
Very interesting. Could it has something to do with this?:

6/9/96 said:
Q: (L) D4’s next question: what did Paul say during his out of body experience, and why were these things not ‘lawful for a man to speak?’
A: Jesus said: “Give to Caesar that which is Caesars.”

Q: (L) How does that apply to this question?
A: Ponder for learning.

Also, regarding the Roman wives, here is one of the later comments made on Jesus' family:

12/4/99 said:
Q: I want to clarify the issue of Jesus’ wives. The first time we asked, you said that Jesus was not married, but had three children with three Roman women. The second time we asked, you said he had a wife, Anatylenia, and had three children with this one woman. My question is: did he have six children, three with one woman, and one each with three other women?
A: No.

Q: He had a wife and not the three Roman women?
A: No.

Q: Did he have a wife?
A: Three women, all were wives, in the “Biblical sense.”

Q: Now, Anatylenia was one of these Roman women?
A: Yes.

Q: Who were here parents? What was her patronym?
A: Sermalain and Galleinia.

Q: There were three children, one from each woman?
A: Yes.

Q: Male and female children?
A: Yes.

Q: How many of these children were male?
A: Two.

Q: Two boys and one girl.

Q: What was the name of the boys?
A: No, not for tonight’s session. Low energy now. So, goodnight.

The end of that session seems kind of evasive -- maybe there was some reason why this was a touchy subject, at least at the time. I haven't done any reading on Julius Caesar, so for now I'm just using Wikipedia, but in regard to the excerpt above the numbers of wives/lovers/children and gender of the children is pretty interesting:

First marriage to Cornelia Cinnilla, from 83 BC until her death in childbirth in 69 or 68 BC
Second marriage to Pompeia, from 67 BC until he divorced her around 61 BC
Third marriage to Calpurnia Pisonis, from 59 BC until Caesar's death

Julia with Cornelia Cinnilla, born in 83 or 82 BC
Caesarion, with Cleopatra VII, born 47 BC. He was killed at age 17 by Caesar's adopted son Octavianus.
adopted: Gaius Julius Caesar Octavianus, his great-nephew by blood, who later became Emperor Augustus.
Marcus Junius Brutus: The historian Plutarch notes that Caesar believed Brutus to have been his illegitimate son, as his mother Servilia had been Caesar's lover during their youth.[126]

Cleopatra VII mother of Caesarion
Servilia Caepionis mother of Brutus
Eunoë, queen of Mauretania and wife of Bogudes
This may be obvious to many but I found it interesting that they both share the same initials, and the the names of their respective betrayers are phonetically similar.
This is the main go-to book for data about Caesar including many pages of coin issues, archaelogical stuff, texts.

Timótheos said:
This may be obvious to many but I found it interesting that they both share the same initials, and the the names of their respective betrayers are phonetically similar.

Yes Francesco Carotta also touches on both of those things on the documentary and much more...

In fact if I've go it right, the two names of the betrayers are so strikingly similar that if you trace back their original greek pronunciation and writing they are almost perfectly similar!

He explains this specific part from 01:20:30 until 01:24:52 in the video...

Pashalis said:
Found this video documentary about Francesco Carotta and his idea about Jesus being Caesar:

The Gospel of Caesar:

Documentary film about a linguist and a Catholic priest, who search for and find the origins of Christianity and the real historical Jesus: Julius Caesar.

Watching now...
Can't remember if it's been mentioned yet on the forum, but I found out about this book during a search on Stoicism:

Stoicism in Early Christianity by Tuomas Rasimus, Troels Engberg-Pedersen, Ismo Dunderberg


Highlighting the place of Stoic teaching in early Christian thought, an international roster of scholars challenges the prevailing view that Platonism was the most important philosophical influence on early Christianity. They suggest that early Christians were more often influenced by Stoicism than by Platonism, an insight that sheds new light on the relationship between philosophy and religion at the birth of Christianity.
Here's a .pdf of Fustel's "The Ancient City" in English

from the title page said:
The Ancient City
A Study on the Religion, Laws,
and Institutions of Greece and Rome
Numa Denis Fustel De Coulanges

Pashalis said:
Found this video documentary about Francesco Carotta and his idea about Jesus being Caesar:

The Gospel of Caesar:
Fascinating compelling video. Still, there should be another Jesus christ who is stoic , reiki healer, christed one who exposed psychopathology whose teachings this emperor JC overshadowed for 2000 years . Fascinating part is how religious traditions narrated the different perceived historical facts with different meanings which became fundamentals of the religion.
What is staggering are the icons from Caesar's Funeral, a man on a cross!
Still watching the Documentary, really impressive. Just one thing I haven't got really yet... Does this imply that the history of Jesus was wrapped around that of Caesar, or Caesar WAS actually Jesus??

This dirty job of translating a whole History from a place to another, like Homer's, is going to be annoying ;)
Timótheos said:
This may be obvious to many but I found it interesting that they both share the same initials, and the the names of their respective betrayers are phonetically similar.

Yeah, Pashalis mentioned about the documentary, and below is from the "summary" by Carotta (adding here for data):



The question is:


Framework of the argumentation:


In our minds Caesar is a field marshall and a dictator. However, authentic images (statues and coins) portray the idea of the clementia Caesaris, a clement Caesar. The bust of Caesar in the Torlonia Museum resembles Jesus significantly. Even the wreath he wears, the oak wreath of the soter, the Savior, corresponds in form and significance to the crown of thorns worn by the Holy One.


Both Julius Caesar and Jesus began their careers in northern countries: Caesar in Gaul, Jesus in Galilee; both cross a fatal river: the Rubicon and the Jordan; both then enter cities: Corfinium and Cafarnaum; Caesar finds Corfinium occupied by a man of Pompey and besieges him, while Jesus finds a man possessed by an impure spirit. There is similarity in structure as well as in place names: Gallia > Galilaea; Corfinium > Cafarnaum; occupied/besieged > possessed (both obsessus in Latin). The similarities remain consistent throughout (when occupation or besieging is referred to in the one text, possession is used in the other, etc.)


Caesar > Jesus
Pompey > John (the Baptist)
Antonius > Simon
Lepidus > Peter
(Decimus) Junius (Brutus) > Judas
(Marcus Junius) Brutus > Barabbas
Octavianus (Augustus) > John (the disciple)
Nicomedes of Bithynia > Nicodemus of Bethania
Cleopatra > (Mary) Magdalene
Julia (widow of Marius) > Mary
The Senate > The Sanhedrin
Gaul > Galilee
Rubicon > Jordan
Corfinium > Cafarnaum
Rome > Jerusalem

People and places have the same function in both stories:

Pompey is the political godfather of Caesar and competes with him in the same way John the Baptist does with Jesus.

Antony and Lepidus became Caesar’s successors, the first as flamen, high priest of the Divus Julius cult, the second as pontifex maximus, just as Simon and Peter do with Jesus (they both melt into one figure – Simon Peter).

Decimus Junius Brutus betrays Caesar as Judas betrays Jesus.

The other Brutus is Caesar’s murderer and Barabbas is a murderer.

Octavian is the young Caesar, his posthumously adopted son. John is adopted by Jesus as he is dying on the cross.

Nicomedes of Bithynia was said to have had nightly meetings with Caesar as did Nicodemus of Bethany with Jesus.

Cleopatra had a special relationship with Caesar as did Mary Magdalene with Jesus.

Julia, Caesar’s aunt and widow of Marius plays the same role as Mary, the mother of Jesus.

The Senate is Caesar’s enemy, just as the Council is Jesus’ Satan.

Caesar comes from Gaul, in the north, at the beginning of the Civil War, while Jesus also comes from the north, Galilee, at the beginning of his public life.

Corfinium is the first city Caesar occupies and Cafarnaum is the first city Jesus enters.

Rome is the capital, where Caesar first triumphs and later is assassinated. Jerusalem is the city where Jesus is celebrated on Palm Sunday and later put to death.

Names resemble each other in writing and phonetically – Gallia and Galilaia, Corfinium and Cafarnaum, (Julia) Mària and Marìa, Nicomedes of Bithynia and Nicodemus of Bethania, etc. Other examples are not as obvious but can still be recognized: Junius (Brutus) and Judas, Brutus and Barabbas, Senatus and Satanas, etc., or even ROMA and HieROsolyMA, Antonius and Simona (mirror images, from right to left, as if it were written in Aramaic), etc.


Most quotes are word for word, sometimes with insignificant differences:

«He who does not take sides is on my side» reoccurs as «For he that is not against us is for us.».
«I am not King, I am Caesar» appears as «We have no king but Caesar».
«The best death is sudden death» appears as «What you are going to do (lead me to death), do quickly».
«Did I save them, that they might destroy me?» is «He saved others; he cannot save himself.»

Only in two cases are there slight, yet meaningful distortions:

«Alea iacta est(o)», «The die is cast», became «… casting (a net into the sea): for they were fishers» (confusion of lat. alea, die, and gr. (h)aleeis, fishers) – the miraculous netting of fish).
«Veni vidi vici», «I came, I saw, I conquered”, changed to «I came, I washed and I saw.» (confusion of enikisa, I won, and enipsa, I washed) – the healing of the blind.

An additional confirmation is that the words as well as actions of Caesar and Jesus reoccur in the same place and in the same sequence, while preserving the same chronology. This is easily demonstrated by comparing the different chapter and verse (paragraph) numbers of the quotes used above:

alea/aleeis (the die / fishers):
App. BC 2.35; Plut. Caes. 32 / Mk 1:16
no side / not against us:
App. BC 2.37; Plut. Caes. 33; Caes. Civ. 1.33, 1.85 / Mk 9:40
veni vidi vici / I came, washed and saw:
App. BC 2.91; Plut. Caes. 50 / Jh 9:7-11 =ca. Mk 8:24
not King / no king:
App. BC 2.108; Plut. Caes. 60 / Jh 19:15 (=ca. Mk 15:15)
App. BC 2.115; Plut. Caes. 63 / Jh 13:27 (=ca. Mk 14:21)
App. BC 2.146; (=ca. Plut. Caes. 68)/ Mk 15:31

The only apparent inconsistency is in the second example. That quote, however, in general repeated by Caesar as proof of strategical focus also appears in different places in classical historians (twice in Caesar’s own report of the Civil War, 1.33 and 1.85, while Sueton, who uses the quote a total of 89 times, uses it for the first time in Chapter 75 of his biography of Caesar). The sequence inversion in the 4th and 5th example is not relevant because their position in Mark is only hypothetically determined by John who is known for not taking chronology too exactly (even so, both quotes are closely aligned)

There is an easily recognized pattern: the miraculous victories of Caesar become the victorious miracles of Jesus.

Accordingly Caesar’s clashes with the Caecilii, Claudii and Metelli mutate into the healing of the blind (lat. caecilius = blind), lame (lat. claudius = the lame) and crippled (metellus mistakenly from mutilus = mutilated)

There appear to be alterations in the text which must have taken place during the long copy process: the Gospel would therefore have originated from a mis-copying of a report on the Roman Civil War – first from cumulative copying mistakes and then a final «logical» editing.

Other observations confirm these results. Ex:

E) THE EASTER LITURGY DOES NOT FOLLOW THE GOSPEL, BUT THE BURIAL RITUAL OF CAESAR (as Ethelbert Stauffer proved, cf. Jerusalem und Rom im Zeitalter Jesu Christi, Bern 1957, p. 21).

Fire does not appear in the Gospels, but it is of utmost importance in the Easter Vigil as it is in the cremation of Caesar. Nevertheless in the Gospels fire does not disappear completely: the PYRA mutates into MYRA, the stake into myrrh (which is given to Jesus with wine and vinegar respectively).

Consequently, the suit of armor of Vercingetorix, which should have hung at the trophy, the cruciform memorial of victory, at the head of Caesar’s bier, was replaced by Anthony with a wax representation of the assassinated body of Caesar, stripped of his blood splattered toga and exposed to all the mourning who perceived it as a cross.

The corresponding dates of death, the Ides of March and the 15th day of Nizan are a further chronological confirmation of the Easter Vigil representing Caesar’s death.

What emerges from the comparison is the fact that no matter what the comparison the same structures and sequences are found and differences are reduced to the simple mix up of letters. What really changes is the perception.

All of these similarities—there is a complete synopsis of Caesar’s biography and Mark’s gospel in the German text; the lectures stress the gems found in writing mistakes and mutations; the iconography studied stresses the fact that typical Jesuanic traits, such as the Pieta-face, the crown of thorns, the long hair, the beard, the clothing, the crosier, the aureole, all variations of the cross, the Resurrection, the Ascension, etc. previously occur on coins with Caesar’s likeness and are still evident in those minted by Antony and Octavian Augustus – cannot be attributed to pure chance and require an explanation.

The most convincing one is:


The proximity of languages offered a convenient breeding ground for this change with the Latin of the colonies slowly giving way to the Greek of the surroundings (with occasional emergence of the Aramaic substratum).

The political changes which occurred with Vespasian and Titus after the Jewish war, such as the necessity of integrating Jews into the empire, led to the development of a cult and texts ad usum Iudaeorum: Divus Julius became the Messiah. Adding quotes from the Biblia Iudaica, which replaced the classical one, helped to make the most Roman of all histories a Jewish story.

SUMMATION: The protoevangelium seems to be the Historiae of Asinius Pollio, which were not only the basis for the works of future historians (particularly Appian and Plutarch), but also the basis for liturgical texts used throughout the entire empire in the caesarea, the temples of Divus Julius.

This popular version, anchored in the daily and religious life of the people, was transformed by the cult and changed during the copying and translation process – traduttore traditore – and eventually became our Gospel. The fact that the Church always claimed that St. Mark’s Gospel was written in Latin, in Rome twelve years after the Lord departed is confirmed in an impressive way.

RESULT: The century long debate as to whether the Gospels are history or literature, a product of tradition or editing, is traced back to objective and verifiable proofs and proven. The question as to whether Jesus was actually a historical figure is also solved: Jesus is the historically transmitted figure of Divus Julius.
seek10 said:
Pashalis said:
Found this video documentary about Francesco Carotta and his idea about Jesus being Caesar:

The Gospel of Caesar:
Fascinating compelling video. Still, there should be another Jesus christ who is stoic , reiki healer, christed one who exposed psychopathology whose teachings this emperor JC overshadowed for 2000 years . Fascinating part is how religious traditions narrated the different perceived historical facts with different meanings which became fundamentals of the religion.

That's what I am wondering about as well. The theorized, early gospel of Q had none of the narrative of Jesus's life, just a collection of wise sayings - Like the Gnostic "Gospel of Thomas".

So was there a separate individual, or individuals, (not Jesus/Julius Caesar), that Q was referring to - who did all those things and was/were also (an) exorcist(s)?

Julius Caesar was a "high priest of Jupiter" early in his career, but he spent most of his life being a general and Consul it seems.

[edit:for clarity]
Top Bottom