The Lost Disciples to Britain #8
Jesus or Jupiter?
DRAMA OF THE LOST DISCIPLES TO BRITAIN #8 by George Jowett (1961) JESUS OR JUPITER? THE Commander-in-Chief selected by the Emperor Claudius to carry out his edict was none other than the famous Aulus Plautius, called the Scipio of his day. He stands in Roman history as one of the most brilliant commanders and conquerors in her military record. He arrived in the area of Britain, we now know as England, A.D.43, making his headquarters at Chichester. Plautius lost no time in sending his veteran Legions into action, directing his campaign to the south against the Silurians, thus cutting off the powerful Brigantes in the remote north, who were the Yorkshire Celts. Both armies clashed with appalling violence and in this first conflict the Romans, probably underestimating the quality of their opponents, were forced to retreat. In the various battles that followed, to his surprise the Roman General realized he was confronted with a military intelligence that matched his own and an army of warriors, though greatly outnumbered, were undaunted and fought back with a fearless ferocity which had never before been encountered by the veteran soldiery of Rome. For the first time the Romans found they were not opposing a race of people who could be terrorized by numbers or brutalities. To their dismay, as reported by Tacitus and like the Nazis in World War II, they found that destruction of the British sacred altars increased their anger, making them blind to odds and circumstances. The more destructive and brutal the Roman persecution the more determinedly did the Briton strike back. At the onset the British Silurian army was led by Guiderius, the elder brother of Arviragus, who was second in command. Guiderius had succeeded his father to the kingdom of the Silures. Arviragus, as Prince, ruled over his Dukedom of Cornwall. In the second battle with the Romans Guiderius was killed in action. Arviragus succeeded his slain brother in command of the army and to the kingdom of the Silures. At this time the second branch of the Silurian kingdom lying farther south in what now is Wales, had not entered the conflict. Caradoc, King of the Welsh Silures, was fist cousin to Arviragus, a much older man and an experienced military leader. A few years before this record his father, known as 'the Good King Bran', had abdicated his throne voluntarily in favour of his son Caradoc. Bran was a deeply religious person and had resigned his kingship to become Arch Druid of Siluria. He and his family had accepted the new faith and some of the members of the family had been already converted and baptized by Joseph by the laying on of hands, but Bran and Caradoc had not received this final act of conversion. Now as the conflict between Roman and Briton increased in vigour and territorial scope, Caradoc realized the seriousness of the situation, particularly since the death of his cousin Guiderius. It was agreed that a more concerted and determined military action was needed against the Romans. Arviragus, by necessity, was only substituting in command for his slain brother. It was law among the British that the supreme leader of the army, especially when more than one clan was involved, could only be appointed by general acclamation of the people, the military council and the Arch Druids. The election to such a command was known by the official tide of Pendragon, meaning Commander-in-Chief. By popular election Caradoc, better known in history by the name the Romans gave him - Caractacus - was created Pendragon. THE GREAT CARACTACUS Caractacus, as we shall now call him, was a man of great vigour, intelligent, versed in the arts of politics and warfare. As is to be expected, being raised in a religious household, he had deep religious convictions. He had received his education chiefly in the British universities and partly at Rome. He was an able administrator, of noble men and outstanding stature. His countenance was described by Roman writers as 'bold and honourable'. Such was the man who was elected Pendragon to conduct the war against the invading Romans. He began the continuation of the strife with all his natural energy. Out of this bitter conflict his outstanding military genius, his indomitable character and invincible courage carved for him an immortal name in history that was never to perish in British and Roman annals. In them he stands out as one of the greatest examples of all that is grand and noble. A magnificent patriotic representative of the unconquerable valour of his race. Feared by the foe, it is said that Roman mothers used his name to quiet their children. His military merit won the unstinted admiration of the enemy who named him 'the Scourge of the Romans'. Historically his achievements are well known, but not so well the reasons for them. Modern historians in dealing with the Roman invasions completely ignore the reason for the great Roman invasion of Britain. Never once do they mention the Edict of Claudius, or explain that it was a war of religious extermination, designed to crush Christianity at its source. Evidently they were totally ignorant of the true reason. They could easily have been enlightened by reading the Roman records of that time. They write off the nine years of ceaseless warfare between Roman and Briton, led by Caractacus and Arviragus against the greatest Roman generals, as though it was of no significance. (Oh it's not that they did not read the Roman records, I'm sure many did; it is because of deliberate bias and just out and out fraudulant mis-application of history. They wanted us to believe not the truth but their purposely retelling of history from their bias - Keith Hunt) They give the impression that the British armies were driven like wild sheep before the Roman Legions. Surely it takes but little imagination from even a casual perusal of this campaign to realize that it would not take nine years for the Roman Empire to subdue opponents who were merely wild, painted barbarians. By this time Rome had conquered all the world except Britain. They had defeated mighty armies skilled in warfare and led by brilliant kings and generals. The conquered nations they had enslaved in Africa, Asia and Europe testify to their despotic brutality. The same Roman generals who had accomplished these conquests led the Roman army in Britain and failed, one after the other. With such a far-flung Empire to protect the Roman emperors could not afford to keep their greatest army and best commanders in Britain for nine years. Less could they afford the decimation of their veteran Legions in useless combat. The enormous loss of lives on both sides sustained in many of the battles in Britain, according to the records, were larger than the loss in most of the battles in World War I and World War 11. Such losses do not indicate a leisurely Roman campaigns in Britain. In some of the battles several of the greatest Roman generals were engaged in conducting battle strategy at the one time. 1 This was an experience never before called for of Roman generalship. In World Wars I and II, when the full forces of the Allies were engaged, their numbers greatly outnumbered the enemy. It was the absolute reverse in the British-Roman, Claudian campaign. Common sense shows there could only be one reason for this long conflict. The Romans had met their match in military genius and in man-to-man combat a warrior ferocity that outmatched their tough veterans. The fierce, fearless spirit of the British soldiery appalled the Romans. Their bravery and disdain of death shocked them. The great Agricola, engaged in the British campaign, stated that it would be no disgrace if he fell in battle among so brave a people. This had to be more than a defence of the shores which could ...... 1 Tacitus, Agricola, ch, 14 and 17. (The Roman historian Tacitus gives us great details in some of the batlles and words of the Roman leaders and the British leaderrs. 30 years ago the writings of Tacitus were easily obtainable in the large public Libraries - it seems it is not so easy today, maybe the Libraries of Toronto, New York, London, and others will still have Tacitus' books - Keith Hunt) ...... have been readily ended by coming to terms with the Romans. It was a battle against extermination of all the Briton held dear and, as Winston Churchill promised the Nazis, would happen again. They fought on the sands, on the fields, in the streets and the lanes and by-ways, to very death. On these fields the Cross of Christ was unfurled as given to Arviragus by St. Joseph, so 'all nations should see', for the first time in military history. This alone proclaimed what the British were fighting for: defence of their new faith, Christianity, the Gospel of Jesus, with the freedom it gave to all who believed in Him. Caractacus is given official credit as being the first general to lead a Christian army in battle in defence of the faith. As Pendragon of the British, elected by them in open council, this is true. But it was Guiderius and Arviragus who led the first battle against the Romans. It was they who first stopped Aulus Plautius in his tracks. Guiderius was the first British king to fall for Christ. Before Caractaus was elected Pendragon the British battalions had marched towards the foe flying the coat of arms bequeathed to Arviragus by Joseph, on their battle standards and painted on their war shields and this, long before St. George was born. (It is very doubtful that Joseph and other disciples of Christ ever gave their consent for any British army to go to war. The New Testament Christian is not of this world, the New Testament Christian cannot partake in a nation's war machine, nor stand behind and give support to a nation's war machine. The time for New Testament Christians to make war on physical people is when Christ comes again; when Christians will be made immortal and will come from the clouds of heaven with Jesus, to fight against those who will fight Christ at His coming - Zechariah 14 - Keith Hunt) Fearlessly they met the full force of unconquered Rome and defeated them. This is the imperishable record of the valiant British in the Claudian nine-year war. Throughout the entire campaign Arviragus fought as the right-hand man of the Pendragon, Caractacus, and for years after when Caractacus no longer led the British forces against the plundering, murdering Romans, he conducted the conflict. Though the Romans destroyed every altar in their path, not once were they able to pierce through to their objective, the Isle of Avalon, the Sanctuary of Christendom. St. Joseph and his Bethany companions were never molested nor was their shrine ever violated by Roman intrusion. (At best the leaders of the British armies were nominal "Christians" - more political people who were defending not just some relatively at this time, a small group of true Christians, but were mainly defending their land against a known barborous Empire of ruthfulness as they desired to conquer the samll area of the known world of the West - Keith Hunt) No better picture can be obtained of the relentless manner in which this war was fought, with victory swinging from one side to the other, than by reading the reports of the foremost Roman writers, Tacitus, Martial, Juvenal and others. The story chronicled by the pens of the enemy gives more substance to the truth than if it were written by our own. With ungrudging admiration they tell how the Silurian warriors, led by Caractacus, Arviragus and the Arch Priests, swept onward in irresistible waves over the bodies of their dead and dying comrades with a battling savagery that appalled the hardened, war-scarred veterans of the Roman Legions. Their fierce outcries of defiance rang over the din and clash of sword and shield. For the first time the Romans met women warriors fighting side by side with their men in righteous combat. Tacitus states that their long-flowing flaxen hair and blazing blue eyes were a terrifying sight to behold. 1 For the first time the Roman soldiery heard the amazing motto of the ancient Druidic priesthood transferred into a clarion Christian battle cry: "Y gwir erbyn y Byd", meaning "The Truth Against the World". No finer battle cry was ever employed with equal truth. It has never died. It has lived through the ages and today it is the motto of the Druidical Order in Wales. Truly the British stood alone against the world, fought alone and died alone, even as they did in the most hazardous early years of the last two world wars, battling for the Great Truth and the preservation of its principles of freedom, in the name of their accepted Saviour, Jesus Christ. Tacitus, the Roman historian, writing of the Claudian campaign that lasted for nine years, except for one brief six months' pause, dismally wrote that, although Rome hurled at the British the greatest army in her history, it failed to prevail against the military genius of Caractacus and the reckless fierceness of the British warrior. Many drawn battles were fought and the famed Legions of Rome frequently suffered defeat with terrible slaughter. On occasions when the British suffered severe reverses Tacitus said, "The fierce ardour of the British increased." After two years of ceaseless warfare Claudius, recognizing the futility of the struggle and the terrible drainage on his finest Legions, took advantage of a reverse against Caractacus, at Brandon Camp, A.D.45, to seek peace through an armistice. A sixmonth truce was declared in which Caractacus and Arviragus were invited to Rome to discuss the possibilities for peace. The facts that followed prove that Claudius went to great lengths to come to satisfactory terms with the obstinate British leaders. Hoping to clinch the peace the Emperor Claudius offered to Arviragus, in marriage, his daughter, Venus Julia. And, amazing as it appears, they were married in Rome during the truce period, A.D.45. 2 Here we have the strange instance of a Christian British king becoming the son-in-law of the pagan Roman Emperor Claudius, who had sworn to exterminate Christianity and Britain. ...... 1 Tacitus, Annals, 14:30. 2 Venus Julia, named after Venus, mother of Aeneas, and of the Julian family, therefore of Trojan stock. (The Trojans being from the house of Judah, hence Jewish - you will find that truth expounded on this website - Keith Hunt) ...... Surely one is justified in asking would the Emperor of a nation, then the most powerful in the world, high in culture and intellectual pursuits, have sacrified his natural daughter in marriage to be the wife of a 'crude barbarian', just for the sake of peace? Impossible. There had to be some other valid reason and, as we shall see as time moves on, the unseen Hand of God was writing the script. The circumstances refute the later pernicious propaganda of the Christian-hating Romans who in their benighted prejudice sought to label their most noble foe - barbarian. It is inconceivable. This marriage was but the beginning of other similar strange circumstances that were swiftly to arise. They were to have a tremendous influence on the Christian movement in Rome, with the British dominating the entire scene. For sheer drama and stirring romance these incidents have no equal in the pages of history. During the six months' truce while Caractacus and Arviragus were at Rome discussing peace terms and the latter was getting married, Aulus Plautius, the Roman commander, remained in Britain maintaining the truce on behalf of Rome. During this interval another strange alliance took place in Britain. Gladys (Celtic for Princess), the sister of the British war lord Caractacus, was united in marriage to the Roman Commander-in-Chief, Aulus Plautius! Again we witness the amazing spectacle of a member of the Silurian royal family, a Christian, married to a Roman pagan. Gladys had been personally converted by Joseph of Arimathea, together with her niece, Eurgain, Guiderius, Arviragus and other members of the British aristocracy. Like her father, the ex-King and present Arch Druid, she was devoutly religious, completing her religious instruction at Avalon and in association with the Bethany women. Considering all this, one is immediately intrigued by this unusual situation. It is made more exciting as we realize that her brother and husband were wartime opponents. The marriage of Gladys and Plautius is brought into the Roman limelight by Tacitus in his Annals, 1 wherein he relates with humour the peculiar circumstances and results of a Roman trial in which Gladys, the wife of Plautius, is accused of being Christian. On her marriage Gladys took the name of Pomponia, according to Roman custom, which was the name of the Plautium clan. Later the name Graecina was added, so that she is thereafter known as Pomponia Graecina Plautius. The added name was a distinctive academic ...... 1 Tacitus, Annals, 13;32. ...... honour conferred upon her in recognition of her extraordinary scholarship in Greek. As we shall see, the truce fell through and hostilities were resumed between the British and Romans. Following the marriage of the Roman Commander Aulus Plautius, to the British Princess, it appears as though the Emperor Claudius distrusted leaving further operation of the war in Britain to Plautius. He is recalled to Rome, A.D.47, though honourably relieved of his command. Reference to these events and the trial of Gladys is well covered by Tacitus, as will be noted from the following quoted text: "Pomponia Graecina, a woman of illustrious birth, and the wife of Plautius, who, on his return from Britain, entered the city with the pomp of an ovation, was accused of embracing the rites of a foreign superstition. The matter was referred to the jurisdiction of her husband. Plautius, in conformity to ancient usage, called together a number of her relations, and in her presence, sat in judgment on the conduct of his wife. He pronounced her innocent." From our point of view, the method of the trial provides a humorous situation. It was the custom, by Roman law, to give priority to the nobility to judge and settle any legal disputation where the family was concerned. Consequently it was in order for Plautius to judge his wife. Next we note that Pomponia is judged in the presence of her own relations, all immediate members of the Royal Silurian Christian household undoubtedly acting in her defence. It is quite certain that not much defence was needed. Plautius knew his wife Gladys was Christian before he married her, as were all the immediate members of her family, as well as her royal relatives. Theirs was a love marriage, free of all political significance on either side. The fact that they were married in Britain makes it certain that the bond of holy matrimony was sealed by the Priesthood of her Christian faith. Evidently Plautius had a svmpathetic leaning to the new faith, for we are later informed that he also became a Christian. Viewed in the light of these circumstances it as a forgone conclusion that Plautius would judge his wife guiltless, which he did. The Rev. C. C. Dobson, M.A., a keen student of Celtic-Roman history, in his learned works goes into much detail covering this whole situation, pointing out that Tacitus refers to Pomponia as 'a woman of illustrious birth' - an aristocrat. Her marriage to the Roman nobleman bears this out. Plautius certainly recognized her social station to have been equal to his Roman dignity. That she was unusually talented, as well as highly cultured, is borne out by the honour of her Roman-conferred title, 'Graecina'. The Rev. Dobson writes, "For forty years she was a leader of the best Roman society." A brilliant woman of wide cultural learning, she was a past scholar in classical literature and wrote a number of books of prose and poetry in Greek and Latin as well as in her native language, Cymric. Their home was a meeting-place for the talented and they were to be as intimately acquainted with the Apostles, Peter and Paul, as Gladys had been with Joseph, Lazarus, Mary Magdalene and the rest of the missionaries at Avalon. The Roman records state that when the Roman General Aulus Plautius was recalled to Rome, A.D.47, "He took his foreign wife with him." This statement clearly indicates that his wife was not Roman and, since Plautius was unmarried when he arrived in Britain and was never absent during the years of his command, his wife had to be British. Gladys and Plautius remained in Britain almost eighteen months after their marriage. The armistice had proved fruitless. The British leaders considered the peace terms unsatisfactory. Caractacus and Arviragus did not linger in Rome; but they returned to Britain and with Arviragus went his Roman wife, Venus Julia. All were faced with an unpleasant situation: Plautius in conducting the war against his in-laws, Caractacus against his sister and brother-in-law, and Arviragus opposing his father-in-law, the Emperor Claudius. What Claudius and the Roman Senate had underestimated was the unbending temper of the Britons. He was quickly to learn that it was an impossibility for the British to make any compromise where their religion was concerned. His faith was his most precious treasure for which, as he has long proved, he would willingly die but never relinquish. His religion had taught him that his earthly life was but a stepping-stone to the eventual goal of immortality. Following the Atonement, in the Ascension of Christ, he had obtained satisfactory proof of the fulfilment of the promise that death transcended the grave. It made him both faithful and fearless. Yet he did not willingly seek death. He fully understood that his earthly sojourn was a necessary preparation for the after life. He recognized that Christ had set him free and was solidly convinced that Christianity could only be practised in absolute freedom. Interference with this freedom is what made him the indomitable warrior as the Romans described him. Normally the Briton was a man of peace and a respecter of other peoples' rights. History proves that the ancient Britons were never engaged in territorial conquest or war by invasion except in their own defence, or for punitive reasons. CARACTACUS CAPTURED Ostorius Scapula had replaced Plautius and the war continued for another seven years. Finally, after many bloody battles, the British, under the Pendragon Caractacus, met disaster at Clune, Shropshire, A.D.52, by a strange trick of circumstance. Caractacus was not outmanoeuvred in this last battle by the one General, Scapula. He opposed four of the greatest commanders in Roman history in this action and more. Up to this point things had been going badly against the Romans on the field of battle, as shown by the fact that the Emperor Claudius himself, with heavy reinforcements, came to Britain to support his generals in the field which climaxed the action at Clune. Opposing Caractacus in the Claudian campaign, in allied command with Aulus Plautius, was the great Vespasian, future Emperor of Rome, his brother and his son Titus who a few years later was to put Jerusalem to the torch, destroy its inhabitants and scatter the survivors of Judah over the face of the earth. Added to this illustrious military assemblage was Geta, the conqueror of Mauritania. As matters became desperate, an urgent appeal for help was sent to the Emperor Claudius. He hastened to Britain, taking with him the 2nd and 14th Legions, with their auxiliaries, and a squadron of elephants. He landed at Richborough, joining his other generals on the eve of the battle of Clune, personally directing the battle which saved the day for Rome. It took the combined military genius of four great Roman generals, together with the Emperor and an army that vastly outnumbered the British, to bring about this victory. This in itself is the greatest tribute that could be given to the military excellence of Caractacus, the valorous British warrior. It was a disastrous defeat. Not only was Caractacus captured but his entire family was taken as hostage to Rome. It was the most complete subjection of any royal house on record by an enemy. The British Triads commemorate the event as follows: "There were three royal families that were conducted to prison, from the great, great grandfather to the great grandchildren without permitting one to escape. First the family of Llyr Lllediaith, who was carried to prison at Rome by the Caesaridae. Not one or another of these escaped. They were the most complete incarcerations known as to families." Arviragus and his family were not numbered among the captives. Evidently he was more successful than his cousin Caractacus in making his escape at Clune, for we read of him reorganizing the British army and carrying on the war against Rome for many more years. Among the captives was the wife of Caractacus and his daughter Gladys, as well as his brother who had remained on the battle scene to receive the terms of the victor. Caractacus had been urged to flee so that he might later continue the conflict. However, fate was against him. Caractacus sought sanctuary from Aricia, the Cartismandua of Tacitus, queen of the Brigantes and a grand-niece of the treacherous traitor, Mandubratius, who acquired infamy during the Julian war. By order of the traitorous queen, Caractacus was taken prisoner while asleep, loaded with irons and delivered to Ostorius Scapula, to be numbered with the many other royal captives and shipped to Rome. Tacitus, in his Annals (bk. XII, ch.36), writes that the news of the capture of the famed British warrior sped like wildfire throughout Rome. The event was received by the people with greater jubilation than had climaxed any other Roman conquest, including the victories of Publius Scipio, when he brought Syphas to Rome in chains and Lucius Paulus, who led the proud Perses into captivity. He further states that three million people crowded the, streets of Rome to view the captive British King and the Senate convened to celebrate. Another Roman historian wrote: "Rome trembled when she saw the Briton, though fast in chains." 1 What had this great 'barbarian' chief achieved to cause such a sensation among the high and the low of the conquering Empire? Why was he so feared that the people trembled and shrank from him as he passed by helpless in irons? Fear and respect must have been well deserved to make the Romans cringe in their shoes. Being so dreaded, why did they not dispose of this 'barbarous Christian leader' according to their usual brutal custom? One is inclined to ponder on the mysterious workings of Provi- ...... Morgan, St. Paul in Britain, p.99. ...... dence, as we learn from the contemporary Roman reporters that Caractacus was the first captive kingly enemy not cast into the terrible Tarpeian dungeons. Why? The Roman conquerors were never noted for their clemency. They delighted in humiliating their adversaries, satiating their bestial nature in the most fiendish forms of torture. The greater the renown of their unfortunate victim the less chance he had of escaping the horrors and incarceration of the Tarpeian. This evil experience was specially reserved for the captive kings, princes and great war generals, who were terribly maltreated, starved, and finally strangled to death. Their dead bodies suffered further indignity. With hooks pierced through the broken body, it was kicked and spat on as the mocking soldiery dragged it through the streets of the city, finally to be cast into the nearby river like offal. Yet here was a captive king, leader of the hated Christians, who had conducted a devastating war against Rome over a period of years exceeding that of any other opponent, during which time he had inflicted many disastrous defeats upon the mightiest Roman army ever to march on the field of battle; a warrior who had repeatedly outmanoeuvred the ablest combination of Roman military strategy alone, still feared and looked upon with awe mixed with admiration. Neither he, nor any member of the British royal family was subject in the least to any physical indignities. 1 In those nine years of conflict Eutropius reports in his Roman Records that thirty-two pitched battles were fought with victory swaying from one side to the other. The British Annals report that thirty-nine pitched battles were fought. Is there any wonder, as Tacitus remarks, that people from all parts of Europe poured into Rome to gaze upon this valiant warrior who had so seriously decimated the crack Roman Legions in combat? The record further states that Caractacus, heavily chained, walked proudly with his relatives and family behind the chariot of the Emperor, through the crowded streets of Rome. With this scene before us we can cease to wonder at the series of startling events that transpired from the beginning of the famous trial onward. 2 THE TRIAL OF CARACTACUS On the day of the trial, Tacitus tells us that his daughter Gladys refused to be separated from her father, though it was against the Roman law for a woman to enter the Senate. Voluntarily she walked by the side of Caractacus, up the marble steps into the Senate, as brave and as composed as her father. The report continues, the Pendragon stood before the Emperor ...... 1 Tacitus, Annals, 12:37. 2 Tacitus, Annals, 12:36. ...... full chest, a noble figure, fearless, calmly defiant, unconquered in spirit. The Senate was crowded to capacity and here again we note another breach of Roman law in the presence of another woman. History tells us that the great Queen Agrippira sat on her throne, on the far corner of the Dais, a fascinated witness to the most famous trial in Roman history. This man who should have been the most hated as the leader of the Christian army drew admiration from all sides as he stood poised before his sworn enemy, the Emperor Claudius. Such was the fame of the gallant Christian Briton - Caractacus. As the trial proceeded he spoke in a clear voice, trenchant with the passion of righteous vigour, as he vindicated the rights of a free man. He replied to his prosecutors with words that have lived down through the ages. Probably it is the only episode in this great Christan warrior's life that is remembered by posterity. Free men the world over may read his epic address with blood-warming pride as the pen of Tacitus worded it. In the words of Tacitus, Caractacus addressed the Senate: "Had my government in Britain been directed solely with a view to the preservation of my hereditary domains, or the aggrandizement of my own family, I might long since have entered this city an ally, not a prisoner: nor would you have disdained for a friend a king descended from illustrious ancestors, and the dictator of many nations. My present condition, stript of its former majesty, is as adverse to myself as it is a cause of triumph to you. What then? I was lord of men, horses, arms, wealth; what wonder if at your dictation I refused to resign them? Does it follow, that because the Romans aspire to universal domination, every nation is to accept the vassalage they would impose? I am now in your power - betrayed, not conquered. Had I, like others, yielded without resistance, where would have been the name of Caradoc? Where your glory? Oblivion would have buried both in the same tomb. Bid me live. I shall survive for ever in history one example at least of Roman clemency." 1 Never before or after was such a challenging speech heard by a Roman Tribunal in the Roman Senate. It is the one solitary case in history. Spoken by a Briton, vibrant with the courageous conviction of a free man. ...... 1 Tacitus. Annals, 12:37. ...... This noble address was once the proud oration of every British schoolboy; now, like the Songs of Tara, heard no more. How cheaply today Christians hold this cherished heritage. For many years students of Roman history puzzled their brains seeking for a reason or motive that caused the Emperor Claudius to render his remarkable verdict. Why, they ask, did not Claudius demand the customary Roman revenge? The pages of history are full of their brutal 'triumphs': dragging their unfortunate victims behind chariots; trampling them to death under the feet of elephants as they were forced to lie prostrate along the avenue of triumph; thrown to the starving lions in the arena; torn apart on the wrack, strangled, burnt or confined to the horrible pit of the Mamertine where they went stark raving mad. Did the strange intermarriages between princely Britons and Roman aristocrats, which was also to penetrate into his own family, induce Claudius to make his extraordinary decision? Historians definitely declare to the contrary. Emphatically they affirm that the Roman law was so embedded in the conscience of the Romans, that they would not think, let alone dare to avert traditional ruling. Nevertheless there and then by order of the Claudian Tribunal, Caractacus, with all the members of the royal Silurian family, were immediately set free. As the decision was rendered, we are told that the whole Senate applauded loudly. And the famed Queen Agrippira rose from her dais, approaching the Pendragon, and his daughter Gladys, shaking hands with each according to British fashion, then embracing them, according to the Roman. This display of emotion was another strange deviation from custom. 1 The only restriction imposed in the pardon of Caractacus was that he must remain at Rome, on parole for seven years, and neither he, or any member of his family, were ever to bear arms against Rome. To this Caractacus agreed and never once thereafter did he break his pledge. When he returned to Britain seven years later, even though war was then raging between Briton and Roman, led by the unrelenting Arviragus, Caractacus and his family remained aloof, honour bound. While he remained in Rome he enjoyed all the privileges of a freeman. With his family he resided at the Palatium Britannicum - "the Palace of the British" - which was soon to become world famous in Christian deeds and history. A sons 2 had been permitted to return to Britain and rule over the kingdom of the Welsh Silurians in the stead of his father. During ...... 1 Tacitus, Annals, 12:37. 2 St. Cyllinus, Records of Jestyn ap Gwrgant. ...... the seven years of parole Caractacus was allowed to receive regularly the income from his British estates so that he and his family might continue to live in state, as befitted a royal household. WHY CLEMENCY ON CARACTACUS AND FAMILY? Why Claudius bestowed such generous clemency upon the royal Britons, knowing full well he could never force them to recant their faith, is something which cannot be reasoned in material form. A greater influence was at work in which all these characters were but pawns on the Divine chessboard, moved in their actions by the inscrutable will of the Almighty, as the astounding events that follow prove so clearly, with St. Paul and this branch of the Silurian royal family holding the spotlight at Rome. In concluding the chapter on the valiant Caractacus, it should prove of interest to consider the validity of the remark he made in his address before the Roman Tribune, in which he states he was "betrayed - not conquered". Do the facts support his contention? Undoubtedly they do. It was the unpredictable conditions that brought about the defeat of the British. Overwhelmed by numbers, as they were, it was circumstance and not arms that wrought the catastrophe. As stated before, Claudius had brought over to Britain a squadron of elephants, with other reinforcements, to bolster the distressed Legions of Aulus Plautius. This was the first time these strange creatures had been seen in Britain. They were introduced into the fight with the hope that their massive charging weight would offset the havoc wrought upon the Roman army by the British war chariots, armed with scythes on their wheels. Neither the size nor the charges of these monsters dismayed the British. It was the offensive odour of the elephants that distracted and panicked the horses that drove the British chariots of war. Going completely out of control the horses and chariots wrought more havoc within the British lines during the battle than did the arms of the Romans. 1 Added to this dilemma was the treachery of the Coraniaid, a clan long known for their traitorous dealings. The Romans had succeeded in buying them over. Unknown to Caractacus this insurgent army were hidden in his rear. The enemy had shaped up into the form of a letter L on the field of battle, with the Roman cavalry attacking the British flank. Striving to concentrate on this attack while the frenzied horses ran amok in the centre, the Pendragon was taken by surprise when the hidden Coraniaids ...... 1 Dion Cassius. ...... attacked into the rear. Defeat was inevitable. Seeing all was lost, Caractacus was urged by his brother and others to flee the field before it was too late. He made good his escape but the betrayal of the Pendragon by his cousin Aricia prevented him from connecting with Arviragus, to carry on the conflict. Thus, by the unhappy accident that attend the fortunes of war, Caractacus stated in truth that he was betrayed and not conquered. Later Arviragus avenged the treachery of the Coraniaid, warring through their domain and taking a terrible vengeance. It is of peculiar interest to note that during the nine-year Claudian campaign the Silurians did not receive any reinforcements from the north, nor from Gaul, to whose defence the British had gone on many occasions over the past years. Neither did help come from Hibernia (Ireland) or Caledonia (Scotland). The fact is that help was almost impossible. The Romans used Gaul as a jumpingoff place to invade Britain, thus Gaullish aid was prevented. The Roman navy would block the Hibernians and Caledonia was too sparsely inhabited. At that time the migration of the Scots from Hibernia into the Caledonian highlands had not yet taken place. The powerful northern Brigantes were under the influence of their traitorous Queen who sold out Caractacus to the Romans. Aricia was later deposed and the powerful Yorkshire Britons from then on played an important part in firmly rooting the new Christ faith in Britain. In fact many years after, when the faith appeared to weaken, it was the Yorkshire Britons who strengthened the foundation of Christianity that ensured its enduring perpetuation in Britain. These can be the only reasonable conclusions for the Silurians bearing the brunt of the Roman prosecution. If the whole Celtic nation could have marched as one it is certain that the Romans would have been quickly and decisively defeated and expelled from the Island. With an odd exception, which is ever the rule, there was no unfriendliness among the Celtic peoples. They were staunchly Druidic to begin with, and all showed their eagerness to absorb the instruction of the Christ faith. Throughout the Claudian campaign the Irish and Pictish records tell of an ever-flowing stream of neophytes and delegates from the various kingdoms, journeying to Avalon to receive at first hand instruction from the Arimathean Culdees. It was a greater authority than that of man which decided the Claudian issue. If it had been otherwise St. Paul would most certainly have been seriously handicapped in carrying out the responsibility placed upon him by our Lord to preach to the Gentiles. THE USE OF LATIN The historic tribute to Caractacus is, that WITHOUT the aid of his Christian allies he had proven his sterling ability against the Montgomerys and Eisenhowers of his day. By valour of arms and military strategy he had outmatched them. In the quality of his address before the Roman Tribune we see a man of high integrity and intelligence. His oration is worthy of a Winston Churchill. Yet this is the Briton whom short-sighted historians refer to as 'barbarian'. It could be of interest to the despoilers of historic truth to learn that Caractacus addressed the Roman Tribunal in their own language - Latin. This vernacular, not being that of the British, had necessarily to be culturally acquired. We are authoritatively informed that the Celtic priesthood employed their own common language in compiling their sacred works, using Greek exclusively for civil transcriptions. Latin was not adopted in British ecclesiastical liturgies until centuries later, yet Latin was as familiar to their tongue as was Greek and Hebrew. The long association Britain had with Rome in commerce, culture and social affairs had made each conversant with the other on common grounds. FOLLOWING THE JULIAN CAMPAIGN OF 55 B.C. Following the Julian campaign Of 55 B.C., we learn that British citizens were the only people permitted to walk the streets of Rome as freemen. Actually this privilege was older than the Julian report; nevertheless, by this act and statement it is clearly shown that the only people in the world who were truly freemen and freewomen were the British. Freedom was an all-consuming passion with them as Titus, the son of the Emperor Vespasian, was to learn on other fields of battle than that at Clune. Titus fought thirty battles to subdue the short coastal areas of Anglesey and the Isle of Wight without gratifying results. No Briton ever entered the Temples of Jupiter but, in the ensuing years, thousands of Roman soldiery who served in Britain turned to Jesus, kneeling before the Christian altars with the Christian British. The banner of the Cross under which Caractacus led the British troops for nine years was to be unfurled at Rome and accepted by the Romans as their national insignia. It was the family of Caractacus who first unfurled that standard at Rome and the family of Arviragus who made it steadfast. In the end the Silureans conquered Rome for Christ. .......... NOTE: Well yes some during this period of time did become "Christian" - and some more deeply Christian than others. Obviously some were still very much "political" and "military" unfluenced .... so it would have been in those days, as it was in the days of Constantine 300 or so years later, coming from Britain to fight on Europe's soil, and his supposed vision of seeing the "cross" and being told to fight under it as his standard-bearing emblem - which he did and won the Roman crown. But God does work in wonderful and mysterious ways at times, His work to perform. It was time for Britain to have Christianity, and it was time for Britain to start on the road to GREATNESS, that over time would indeed give her the name GREAT Britain, and an empire that at one time the sun never set on - a world wide empire, as never seen before in the history of mankind, greater than ancient Egypt, Babylon, Greece, Rome, China, and any other empire you care to think of. Truly it was now the beginning of the time when the promises from God to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph, would start to come to pass - a GREAT COMPANY OF NATIONS FROM EPHRIAM JOSEPH/ISRAEL THAT WOULD SPREAD AROUND THE WORLD. Keith Hunt To be continued with "British Foundations of the Church at Rome" |
No comments:
Post a Comment