Eso’s Chronicles 183/ 5
A Midsummer Supper
© Eso A.B.

A long time ago, at a time that may seem like fairy tale time, a ‘King’ was called ‘Basil’ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basil_(name) . A number of words that are still with us derive from that time. For example, the word ‘basilica’ or ‘church’ or cathedral; ‘basil’, the king of savories; ‘base’, which is synonymous with ‘headquarters’. The word derives from Greek language.

Thus, the sign “INRI” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus,_King_of_the_Jews  that is often seen in old paintings above the crucified Jesus, and which we are told is an acronym for ‘Iesu of Nazareth, King of the Jews’, was originally read as INBI, “Iesus Nazarenus, Basil Iudaeorum”.

Though a ‘king’ is a king by whatever name, what we should note is that ‘Basil’ stands for a special king—a king of the people. This is one reason why in former days many saints were given the name of Basil. This is as good a reason as any why originally Jesus was likely called Basil. Moreover, if ‘Iudae’ is a deliberate misspelling of ‘Ludi’ http://ancienthistory.about.com/od/games/g/ludiromani.htm  (games, from ludus, people), then INRI should read INBL, “Iesus Nazarenus, Basil Ludusorum”, Basil of the People; or ‘Basil Ludiorum’, Basil of (religious) Festival or Rites. As the link tells: “The ludi were public Roman religious festivals started, before 220 B.C., as annual communal games to give thanks to the gods.” The word ‘games’ in context can only be a cynical derivative from ‘religious rites’, the rite being a human sacrifice. Moreover, if ‘Roman’ stands for the Byzantine Empire, as the Russian mathematician and historian Anatoly Fomenko http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Chronology_(Fomenko)  claims, the date of the rite is closer to 1118 CE than it is to 220 BC. Notwithstanding post-modern historians, who view Fomenko’s work as that of a “fringe” and “pseudo” historian, the reverse is likely true.

In fact, the story of Jesus, as I have written in other blogs (srch ‘jesusthebogomil’), is the definitive False Flag of Western Civilization, with its post-modern banner seized by the ‘democracy’ of the U.S.

If the reader is familiar with the story of Jesus, he-she will remember that Jesus-Basil and his bookkeeper and disciple Peter are closely associated with a bonfire, that burns early on the morning of the day Jesus-Basil is to be (gamed) crucified http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denial_of_Peter . While in Europe most traces of the ancient Rite meant to assure that the Sun rises have been erased, there remains enough to suggest that the Sun had indeed ceased to rise that day http://biblehub.com/luke/23-45.htm from “…about the sixth hour (in the morning)… there was a darkness over all the earth until the 9^th hour… (in the evening)”. The ‘clock’ that measured the time was a sundial http://www.nist.gov/pml/general/time/revol.cfm .

While the reason given why the Sun is not moving is different from Aztec and Greek versions, it is no less weighty. It concerns the celebration of the Name’s Day https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Name_day  of the son of the Sun: Dionysus (Huan, Ian, Ivan, Jean, John, Zhan, etc.) by those who make laws on a planet where the wood has been cut, the land has been turned to desert, people have been driven into cities, and all other forms of life have been belittled as ‘the Devil’s work’ and are further exploited by corporation scientists through genetic modification. The Name’s Day of Iesu/ Iannis falls on Midsummer’s Eve or Summer Solstice Day, when for about three days the Sun appears to hang in one and the same place in the sky.

On the evening before he is betrayed by his Public Relations man, his disciple Judas, Jesus and his colleagues sit down to an uncommon meal. Jesus’ companion Mary Magdalene, said to be his ‘financial’ benefactor, presents as the main dish a very special kind of pie. The pie has baked into it a fingernail sized piece of coal. Mary Magdalene did not bake the pie herself, because the pie is to be part of a draw (in which she too participates): whoever draws the piece with the coal, must prepare him- or herself to offer his-her life to the Sun on the following day.

What we know as The Last Supper http://www.paintinghere.org/UploadPic/Leonardo_da_Vinci/big/picture%20of%20last%20supper.jpg occurred on the evening the day before Midsummer Day, a day that was also celebrated as Iesus’s Name’s Day. This fact elevates Iesu twice, first as Basil (King) of the day in his own right and, second, as the son of the Sun, who by giving him birth on that day also elevates herself to prominence.

The disciples of Iesu argued that Iesu should not be the only one to fight the laws made up willy-nilly by secular rulers. There was an agreement among them, that all would draw lots. By participating, all signaled that they were ready to offer their lives to the Sun. Iesu made no objections.

It happened that the ruler of Byzantium at the time was King Alexius I. The King had heard rumors of resistance to his ruling among the people. He, therefore, wanted to discover who their leader was. The Emperor had heard that a ‘King of the People’, came from a country of nomads—a people who moved with the Sun and the seasons and herded reindeer for their livelihood. Emperor Alexis sent spies try recruit a spy from among Iesus’s closest followers.

The follower most accessible was Judas. Judas had his reasons: he did not believe that the Sun was a divinity. He was recruited for thirty pieces of silver (we have no real idea of what it was worth then). It also happened that Judas’s piece of pie had the coal in it, but Judas did not let on and swallowed it. Later, a troubled Mary Magdalene spoke to the baker, but was assured that everything had been done right and there were witnesses to prove it. Iesu said: “Do not be concerned. It was and remains my lot to be the son of the Sun.”

While walking along the shore of the Bosphorus that night (there was a full moon), Judas, as if overcome with grief for Iesu’s lot, came up to him and embraced him. This was the signal waited for by the King’s spies, who were hiding among the people of Constantinople, who, too, were talking a walk and enjoying the moonlight.

Shortly thereafter, Iesu and his colleagues (also known as disciples) were surrounded by the Emperor’s armed police and taken into custody. Iesu was brought to the court of the High Priest. The name of the High Priest, some say, was Yannas. He headed Emperor Alexis’ own religion, which was named Christianity. The name was borrowed from the Slavs, among whom the word meant “criss-crossers or ‘markers’ of earth” or more simply plowmen. In those days agriculture had just made its appearance http://p2.la-img.com/249/28182/10780046_1_l.jpg . The ‘Christians’ had no plows as we know them today, but were using stumps of trees with the branches cut down to the length of a foot or a foot and a half. When a a man stood on the stump, and an ox or mule was made to pull it, the ‘plow’ scratches deep marks into the face of Earth.

To scare those who opposed his order to end all celebrations of the Sun (or Midsummer, or Johns Day) and Earth, Emperor Alexis had his gendarmes (armed police) dig a large pit at the Hippodrome. The pit was filled with logs and these set ablaze. The fire burned and sparks rose high into the air all night long and was the talk of Constantinople. Some said that the King had defeated his own purpose, which was to have ‘no’ celebration whatsoever.

There is great confusion about the ‘true’ story of Iesu Basil or what I prefer to call Iesu The Bogomil (Jesus God lover). The reason is that there are at least two stories of what happened.

The Catholic Christian or canonical version of the story has had a wide distribution. The story is accessible in every country and in nearly every language. The ‘Other’ story, however, is not only denied, but the fragments continue to be denied validity. Among the two best ‘other’ stories is that of Basil the Bogomil, whose death has been described in Anna Comnena’s biography of her father Emperor Alexius I of Byzantium http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexiad ; and in the story of Polycarp the Bishop of Smyrna https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polycarp .

Unfortunately, the story of Jesus Christ is a wholly made-up story (probably by the forebears of the modern French) with nearly no recollection of things holy in proto-Christian times.

© Eso Anton BenjaminsNOT-VIOLENT TERROR
2 Terror In The Wind 1



The story of Jesus as told by the New Testament, gives the Passion of Jesus  special attention to elicit from the reader the profoundest of empathy with the horror of it all. The event is alleged to have happened in the 33rd year of Jesus’ life in the city of Jerusalem. This is according to the calendar of the Catholic Church and subsequently all Christian churches. According to the belief of orthodox neo-Christianity, Jesus was born 2010 years ago (counting backward from 2009) in Bethlehem, Palestine.

How was the time of the death of Jesus established?

The Council of Trent (1545-1563) commissioned Joseph Scaligeri (1540-1609) to create for Christendom a new historical chronology. While the argument for the need to establish such a chronology is generally believed to be the prevailing chaos in the chronology of history at that time, an equally good reason for putting history “in order” is that it allowed the Catholic Church to rewrite chronology the way it would like it. Indeed, the 16th century is when centuries of strife by the Church on behalf of the ruling princes against arch-Christianity have ended. The princes of the world and the church have won against the arch-“pagans and heretics”. While the history of money has just begun, there are no further obstacles in the way. The secular forces may proceed with capital accumulation and personal aggrandizement as never before.

Scaligeri was selected not on the grounds of his scholarship, but on grounds of his sympathy with Catholic (neo-Christian) theology. Which is to say, though the chronology of Scaligeri and his followers is interesting and new, can we be sure that Scaligeri is objective? Long before Scaligeri was even born, many books and documents were burned to erase other chronologies and locations of events, and countless forgeries of works alleged to have happened in times imagined were released to the public. Thus, while according to Scaligeri, Jesus was born in the year 1, and died in 33 CE, according to the mathematician and historian Anatoly Fomenko, Jesus may in fact have died sometime between the years of 1084 and 1195.

However, what if Jesus’ name was in reality Basil? Who is Basil? Basil was a holy man living in the Byzantine Empire. He was summoned to Constantinople by the Byzantine Emperor Alexius I (said to have lived 1081-1118), and there executed by the Emperor for of his “heretical” beliefs. Basil however did not die on the cross, but Alexius I’s executioners threw him into a pit of fire. The possibility that Jesus may originally have been Basil may come as a shock some, but the case is worth considering even if there is no final proof. On our answer depends the future, because as many now see, the past is ending on a note not only of a financial and economic crisis (likely to end with a crash), but that the crisis has deep roots in the history of the West. If that history is told contrary to the way it really was and the falsity has affected the way we think and behave, the crash may imbed the falsity for eternity. In that case, our children will repeat our mistakes.

According to Anna Comnena, daughter of Alexius I and author of “The Alexiad of Anna Comnena”*, the “Church” was infiltrated during her father’s reign by “heretics” known as Bogomils (a Slavic word meaning “Lovers of God”). Wishing to trap Basil (the name Vasily is a cognate of)  Alexius I invited him to his quarters, pretended great interest in his teachings, and got Basil to tell him what he believes about God and how one should live under such a God. As they conversed, Alexius I hid behind a curtain a court secretary, who recorded all that Basil told the king.

At the end of the interview the Emperor of Byzantium  rend open the curtain. He then revealed to Basil the text recorded by his secretary, and summoned a conference of “army chiefs and elders of the Church”. After hearing the content of Basil’s teachings, everyone expressed shock and condemned him. Though Basil is not quoted, according Anna Comnena, he “looked askance at our doctrine of the Divine Nature of Christ and wholly misinterpreted His human nature. He even went so far as to call the holy churches the temples of demons and treated as of little importance what among us is believed to be the consecrated Body and Blood of our first High Priest and Sacrifice.”

Basil’s teachings to the king earned Basil “burning and other tortures…”, despite which he [Basil] “…clung with all his might to his devil…. So a huge fire was kindled in the Hippodrome. An enormous trench had been dug and a mass of logs, everyone a tall tree, had piled up to a mountainous height. Then the pyre was lit….”

Brought before the pit, Basil’s woolen cloak was ripped from his shoulders and thrown into the flames. “Let us see if the fire will catch your clothes,” Anna records the executioners as saying with an inflection of contempt for Basil. The heat rising from the pit was so intense that the flames took the cloak into the air. “Look! My cloak flies up to the sky!” Basil is said to have responded to the executioners, who then “…lifted him up and thrust him… into the fire…. The flames… so thoroughly devoured the wretch that there was no odor and nothing unusual in the smoke except one thin smoky line in the centre of the flame.”

We should note that Anna Comnena does not name Jesus or Christ, but presumes it sufficient to call him the “first High Priest and Sacrifice.” Such an avoidance of name makes one think that Anna knows Christ only as a symbol. In fact, in antiquity “Christ” is a name that comes with no other name attached, but was drawn as an X, a cross. In short, Christ is as yet a word that does not represent any one individual, but many individuals who helped to make X so significant and dear.

Anna Comnena writes the story of Basil’s conflict with her Emperor father as if it was a conflict over religious belief. Of course, men do kill each other because of verbal disagreements. At stake may be the Empire—if the Emperor allows his opponent to gain so much public attention as to threaten his position. On the other hand, verbal opponents may also be killed not so much for what they say, but because what they say may give one of the parties to kill him for lateral reasons: the opponent may be standing in the way of acquiring to one gaining more power and/or wealth.


Asterisk & Notes of Interest:

* “The Alexiad of Anna Comnena”, transl. by E.R.A. Sewter, Penguin Books, 1969.

When it comes to the chronology of history, this writer agrees, more or less, with the new chronology of history as proposed by AnatolyFomenko.  .