A deposed Moses appropriates Midian and declares it independent of Egypt
Horemheb, the viscerally anti-Hebrew pharaoh, had two wives, Armenia, his first wife who died before he came to power, and Benretmut, a scion of the Thuthmosside dynasty. Neither of the two gave him an heir. With no legitimate heir in existence, Horemheb had no choice but to appoint Pa-Ramesses, an able administrator, as co-regent in the twilight days of his rule.
There were likely two principal reasons for this gesture. First, it was in order to reward Pa-Ramases for his fawning loyalty to him since days immemorial. Second, Pa-Ramses had the advantage of continuity: he had a son, Seti, and a grandson, both of whom went on to become pharaohs by turns. Thus the line of succession would be definite from the word go.
Horemheb finally died in 1135 BC at age 70, having ruled for 13 years. He was the last pharaoh of the 18th Dynasty. Pa-Ramses then succeeded as Ramesses I, marking the inception of the 19th Dynasty. The name Ramesses was a bow to the national god Marduk: it meant “Ra bore him”, Ra being a component of Amen-Ra, the name by which Marduk was known in Egypt.
Sadly, Ramesses too was getting on in years at the time and so shortly after taking the reins, he appointed Seti, who was in the prime of his life, as co-regent. Whilst Ramesses concentrated on domestic affairs, Seti dedicated himself to military ventures in foreign lands. Seti’s role was crucial as at the time Egypt’s status as an overarching military power was on the wane. The Hittian Kingdom of Asia Minor, today’s Turkey, had conquered today’s Syria, Lebanon, and parts of Canaan and was in fact poised to overrun central Canaan, which to date had been in Egypt’s sphere of influence.
On becoming Pharaoh, Ramesses chose Zaru as the place of his main residence at the expense of the national capital Thebes. If you recall, he had had the Hebrew-Hykso slaves construct him a magnificent home there. It was at this point that the whole of Egypt’s eastern delta region, called Goshen in the Bible, became known as the Land of Ramesses. Accordingly, in the Bible, the term Ramesses when employed (e.g. GENESIS 47:11 and EXODUS 12:37) refers not to the pharaoh but to the settlement. IT WAS AFTER THE ASCENDANCY OF RAMESSES TO THE THRONE THAT FOR THE FIRST TIME IN ABOUT 40 YEARS, THE EXILED MOSES SET FOOT ONCE AGAIN IN THE LAND OF HIS BIRTH.
MOSES HEADS FOR MIDIAN
Let us at this juncture do a flashback to 1352 BC, when Moses was deposed as Pharaoh Akhenaten of Egypt. Although he was not officially banished from Egypt, Moses was obliged to flee Egypt as he was not hundred percent sure of his safety. Ideally, the place he should have headed to was Harran, in modern-day Turkey. Harran was apt in that not only was it the place of his ancestry but it was the major domicile of the Hykso-Hebrews. There, the Hykso-Hebrews abounded more than in any other place on the globe, including Canaan.
The problem was that Harran now was part of the Hittian Kingdom and since the Kingdom was a rival to Egypt, it would not be in position to welcome an ex-pharaoh of Egypt. Also, if Moses were to go to any jurisdiction that was anti-Egypt, the Theban priesthood would have a field day denouncing him as a sellout from birth, being a Hykso-Hebrew on his mother’s side. The Egyptian populace would no longer look to him with a yearning but would cast him as a pet-hate – a traitor who had just bared his true colours. As such, Moses decided to go to a place which though autonomous in the greater scheme of things still was part of and subject to Egypt. This was Midian.
The Midian territory encompasses today’s western Saudi Arabia, southern Jordan, southern Israel, and the Sinai Peninsula. Its politics at the time is not clear-cut. What we know is that the Midianites were the descendents of Midian, the fourth son of Keturah, Abraham’s second Hebrew wife (GENESIS 25:1-2). The vast territory was only very sparsely populated in the 14th century BC: it was not until the 8th-7th century BC that it was extensively settled.
The territory was directly overseen by a native High Priest known as Jethro. It seemed when Egypt concurred it (when that happened is not clear), a local High Priest was installed as its ruler to give the impression to its inhabitants that it by and large still was sovereign. Indeed, Egypt neither had a garrison there nor its own resident governor. But the territory still fell under the aegis of the Egyptian government anyway. Two Egyptian officials were in charge of Midian.
They were the Royal Messenger in Foreign Lands (Secretary of State/Foreign Affairs Minister in today’s terms) and the Royal Chancellor (Finance Minister/Treasury Secretary/Chancellor of the Exchequer in today’s terms). The latter was only involved because he oversaw activities in respect of the highly lucrative turquoise mining operations in the Sinai Mountains.
When Moses was pharaoh, the foreign affairs minister was an official known as Neby, who was at once troop commander, mayor of Zaru, steward of the womenfolk who attended to the queen, and baptising priest in the Aten Temple at Armana. The finance minister was Panehesy. His was a hereditary portfolio, set aside for only the Panehesy clan since the time of Amenhotep III, Moses’ father. Panehesy was also chief priest of the temple of Armana. The Panehesy of Moses’ time was a third-generation Panehesy.
When he departed Egypt for Midian, Moses was approximately 40 years old. He was accompanied by Panehesy and his (Moses) second wife Miriam, a half-sister and mother to Tutankhamen. HE ALSO CARRIED WITH HIM HIS PHARAONIC SYMBOL OF AUTHORITY, TO UNDERLINE BOTH HIS PROTESTATION AT BEING FORCED TO ABDICATE AND HIS PEDIGREE STILL AS A TOP-NOTCH ROYAL WHEREVER HE WENT.
MINERAL WEALTH GALORE IN MIDIAN TERRITORY
The Sinai Peninsula was a significant, though not crucial part of the Egyptian economy by virtue of its mineral resource riches. The southwestern parts of Sinai abounded with copper, bluish lapis lazuli, the blue-green gemstone turquoise, and the bluish-green mineral malachite. The particular places at which mining was done were today’s Wadi Magharah (the Wadi of Caves) and another which is today known as Serabit-el-Khadim. Turquoise for one was being mined in the Sinai Peninsula as early as Sumerian times in what has been described as “one of the world's first important hard-rock mining operations."
These ancient mining ventures were in evidence as recently as the 70s. In a 1972 article titled SINAI OPERATIONS: 1962-1972, which was published in an authoritative scholarly journal, Beno Rothenberg wrote: "We could establish the existence of a fairly large industrial metallurgical enterprise. There are copper mines, miners' camps, and copper smelting installations, spread from the western parts of southern Sinai to as far east as Elat at the head of the Gulf of Aqaba."
Elat, called Etzion-Gaber in the Bible, was the “Pittsburg of the ancient world”. To its immediate north, at a place known as Timna, was what has been dubbed King Solomon’s Copper Mines. Once the ores had been extracted from Timna, they were taken to Elat for smelting and refining in "one of the largest, if not the largest, of metallurgical centers in existence in ancient times”.
The pioneers of the Sinai region’s mining operations, who in Sumerian times served the Anunnaki, were a specialised Semitic tribe known as Qenites, meaning “smiths” or “metallurgists”. They were descendants of the Cain of Genesis. The Qenites are mentioned even in the Bible as inhabitants of the southern Sinai. In the 7th century BC, Esarhaddon, the King of the Neo-Assyrian Empire, boasted that "upon Qanayah, King of Tilmun, I imposed tribute”. But the subjection of Qenites by foreign powers went back a long way.
As early as the 3rd millennium BC, the Qenites were fending off incursions by Egyptian pharaohs. The Egyptians initially were not after the subjugation of the Semitic Qenites as such but simply raided their mines in search of the minerals copper and turquoise in the main. Mafkat, the Egyptian word for turquoise, indeed stemmed from a Semitic verb which meant “to mine” or “extract by cutting”.
That was exactly how turquoise was obtained: tunnels were cut into the rocky sides of the Wadi canyon and miners went in to chisel out the metal. It was a back-breaking job which in Anunnaki times was restricted to humans imprisoned for life who toiled under the harsh supervision of the Qenites. Enkidu of THE LEGEND OF GILGAMESH fame was on his way to the mining belt of the Sinai to begin his life sentence for having destroyed Jehovah-Enlil’s highly prized fighter craft when he met with disaster.
The Sinai Peninsula came under Egyptian control during the 12th Dynasty (circa 1991-1782 BC), only to break loose in the post-Exodus period. Pharaoh Ramses III, who reigned in the century following the Exodus, recorded his invasion of these coppersmiths' dwellings and the plundering of the metallurgical center of Timna-Elat in this somewhat exaggerated statement: “I destroyed the people of Seir (Sinai), of the Tribes of the Shasu (Midianites).
I plundered their tents, their people's possessions, their cattle likewise, without number. They were pinioned and brought as captives, as tribute of Egypt. I gave them to the gods, as slaves into their temples. I sent forth my men to the Ancient Country (Midian), to the great copper mines which are in that place. Their galleys carried them; others on a land journey were upon their asses. It has not been heard before, since the reign of the Pharaohs began.
The mines were found abounding in copper; it was loaded by ten thousands into the galleys. They were sent forward to Egypt and arrived safely. It was carried and made into a heap under the palace balcony, in many bars of copper, a hundred thousand, being of the colour of gold of three refinings. I allowed all the people to see them, like wonders.”
MIDIAN RICH WITH FLORA AND A BIT OF FAUNA
When we read of the term Sinai Desert, the image that immediately comes to mind is that of sheer aridity – a rocky mountain mass and sand dune expanse. That is only partly true. The Sinai has its share of deep, canyon-like wadhis (seasonal watercourses), and naturally growing, climate-attuned floral species. The Sinai receives about 2 billion m2 of rainfall annually, only half of which is lost to evaporation.
Of the remainder of the rainfall, half flows on the surface as run-off, whilst the other half percolates to groundwater reservoirs, thus making it possible for cultivation to take place. Barley, fruits, market vegetables, dates, and olives do flourish there. Date palm groves for one are scattered throughout the whole peninsula. There are a thousand species of plants, many unique to the Sinai, varying from tall trees to tiny shrubs and which grow with impressive persistence.
The Sinai is home to over half a million Bedouins who rare livestock because nomadic grazing is possible in the peninsula. Animals are rare, but the species represented include ibex, gazelles, sand foxes, leopards, wildcats, jackals, hares, hedgehogs, and moles. Falcons and eagles are indigenous, and there are also seasonal migrants such as quail, partridge, and grouse.
According to climatologists, the Sinai of Moses’ day was even less arid than it is today and therefore more conducive to human habitation as well as to both arable and pastoral farming. One crop grown there those days was onion, which Egypt exported to the Mediterranean coast. But the agricultural mainstay was the date palm. Then, as today, it was the Sinai’s principal cash crop. It has multiple uses, which include the following: fruit; food (its kernels and pulp) for camels and goats; building as well as fuel (its trunk); roofing (its branches); and rope and weaving (its fibres).
The date fruits were a ubiquitous feature on the menu of the Anunnaki, the Old Testament gods, and demigods. This was likely because at least one species of the date palm was the Elixir of Life, or the Tree of Life, which was used to lengthen the lives of the Anunnaki and demigods, hence the Psalmist statement that, “the righteous l like a date palm shall flourish”. In Sumerian cylinder seal and clay tablets depictions, the date palm was equated to the Shem – the rocket – which was another symbol of eternal life.
Two Anunnaki astronauts were shown flanking the rocket or date palm interchangeably, as if to say it was on the plant they relied for their extraordinary longevity whilst here on Earth. When prophet Ezekiel envisioned the rebuilt Jerusalem temple during the Babylonian captivity, he saw it with either two date palms flanking an angel (an Anunnaki) or two angels flanking a date palm.
Acacias are the one tree in particular that thrive in parched conditions. Their tap roots reach deep into the subsurface moisture and therefore they can endure 10 years of rainlessness. Acacia wood was used in the construction of ancient temples. The famous Ark of the Covenant was made of acacia.
MOSES SETTLES AT MOUNT SERABIT
So when Moses headed for Midian after departing Egypt, he wasn’t destined for a classical wilderness: he was headed for a place that was reasonably inhabitable. If it were simply sheer desert, there was no way a man of his status – an ex-King accustomed to living in the lap of luxury – would have bothered to set up home there.
The exact place in the Sinai Peninsula Moses and his retinue set course for was a settlement known today as Serabit-el Khadim. This was at the foot of what the Bible calls Mount Horeb but which is today known as Mount Serabit. As we hinted above, this place was a mining hub of the Sinai, noted, in particular, for the mineral turquoise.
Serabit, however, was not merely of economic significance: it also was a holy place. At the peak of the mountain, about 2600 feet above sea level, was a temple dedicated to the Anunnaki goddess Hathor. Hathor, meaning “Falcon House”, was the Egyptian name for Ninmah, Enki’s step sister and Enlil’s half-sister. The term Falcon House was very fitting. Firstly, as indicated above, the Sinai Peninsula was a natural habitat for falcons, a type of bird.
Second, Sinai previously housed the Anunnaki spaceport (destroyed by Ninurta, Enlil’s eldest son, in a nuclear blitz in 2024 BC). Anunnaki astronauts were metaphorically referred to as falcons or eagles, both species of which were indigenous to the Sinai. And if you recall, the Sinai Peninsula, also known as Tilmun, was pre-the-atom-blast entrusted to Ninmah being a neutral area which was not supposed to be under Enkite or Enlilite jurisdiction during the first partition of the known world. Ninmah was also known as “Lady of the Sinai” or “Lady of the Mafkat”.
A team of pioneer explorers who toured Mount Serabit early in the 20th century found a statuette of Moses’ mother Tiye and pillars and stelae denoting the Egyptian kings through the ages. This is ample evidence that Serabit once served as Moses’ lair and he so decorated the temple as to remind himself and the worshippers of his royal pedigree.
MOSES MAKES UNILATERAL DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE
Arriving at Serabit, Moses was met by Lord Jethro, the High Priest of Midian who was a Qeninite by race. Although Moses was a deposed King, Jethro received him with all the protocol due to a King. The two colossuses jelled. ALMOST FROM THE VERY OUTSET, THEY CONTRIVED TO DECLARE MIDIAN INDEPENDENT OF EGYPT, WITH MOSES AS MIDIAN’S NEW KING. Two factors made such a scheme realisable.
First, Moses was a first-class military general and if Egyptian forces came after him, he would fight them to the death. If possible, he would ally with the Hittites, who were now the world power in the ascendant. Second, Moses’ own son Tutankhamen would soon be crowned Pharaoh of Egypt and there was no way he would incline to waging war against his own father. In any case, the Egyptian army was overseen by Moses’ uncle Ephraim. Even the incumbent, stop-gap Pharaoh, Aaron, would not countenance the notion of “training guns” on his own cousin, who was in fact more of a brother than a cousin to him. Blood always was thicker than water.
In order to further cement ties, Lord Jethro offered Moses his own daughter Zipporah. Moses’ marriage to Zipporah (not to the Ethiopian Tharbis as the Bible would have you believe as the Tharbis marriage was by this time a thing of the past) greatly incensed Miriam as it meant she was going to be relegated further down in the rankings of Moses’ spousal harem.
Even Aaron, when he heard that Moses had wedded Zipporah, was far from happy. However, Moses’ gesture made a great deal of political sense. The Midianites would not have readily welcomed him as their new King if he hadn’t taken the hand of one of their daughters. It turned out Moses had calculated right. None of his fellow Amarna Kings – Aaron, Tutankhamen, or Ephraim – confronted him militarily for the secession.
Even Horemheb was concerned more about preventing Moses from making a heroic comeback to Egypt than confront him head-on in a war of reclamation. The incumbent pharaoh Ramesses I also left Moses pretty much to his own devices but he was so heavy-handed in his persecution of the Hykso-Hebrews that Moses decided to return to Egypt. His main goal, however, was not to free his people from the pharaoh’s yoke: IT WAS TO RECLAIM THE THRONE OF EGYPT AND REUNITE EGYPT AND MIDIAN.
NEXT WEEK: CAN MOSES BOUNCE BACK AS KING OF EGYPT?
A case can be made, General Atiku, that history’s most infamous Roman is Pontius Pilate. It was Pilate who condemned Jesus, the “Son of God”, to the most cruel, most barbaric, and most excruciating of deaths – crucifixion – and cowardly at that as the gospels attest for us.
Yet the exact circumstances under which the crucifixion took place and what followed thereafter far from jells with what is familiarly known. The fact of the matter was that there was a lot of political wheeling and dealing and boldfaced corruption on the part both of the Jewish authorities and the Roman establishment in the person of Pontius Pilate. In this piece, we attempt, General, to present a fuller photo of Pilate as the centre of the whole machination.
Pilate’s historicity, General, is not in doubt. In 1961, an Italian archeologist unearthed a limestone block at Caesarea Maritima on the Mediterranean coast of Israel, which as of 6 AD was the Roman seat of government as well as the military headquarters. The block bore the inscription, “Pontius Pilate, the Prefect of Judea, has dedicated this Temple to the divine Augusti” (that is, then Roman Emperor Tiberius Caesar and his wife Livia).
Pilate also gets varying degrees of mention in the works of Roman senator and historian Cornelius Tacitus (56-117 AD); the Hellenistic Jewish philosopher and chronicler Philo of Alexandria (25 BC to 50 AD); and the legendary Jewish historian Flavius Josephus (37-100 AD).
Although his year of death (37 AD) is documented, his year of birth is a matter of conjecture, General. He came from the Pontii tribe (hence the name Pontius), a tough, warlike people. The Pontii tribe was of the equestrian class, the second-tier in the Roman caste system. Originally, the equestrians were those Romans with ample pocket power to bribe their way to knightly ranks in the Roman army. Pilate was born to Marcus Pontius, who had distinguished himself as a general in Rome’s military campaigns.
Following one of his particularly sterling military exploits, Marcus was awarded with the Pilum (javelin), a Roman decoration of honour for heroic military service. To commemorate this medal of valour, the family took the name Pilati, rendered Pilate in English and Pilatus in Latin.
The son, Lucius Pontius Pilate, also distinguished himself as a soldier in the German campaigns of Germanicus, a prominent general of the early Roman Empire. Thanks to his scintillating military profile coupled with strategic connections in the hierarchies of the Roman government, Pilate was able to wend his way into the heart of Claudia, the granddaughter of Caesar Augustus, the founder of the Roman Empire and ruler from 27 BC to 14 AD.
Claudia’s mother was Julia the Elder, who was also the biological mother of the apostles John and James. When Claudia was about 13 years of age, Julia sent her to Rome to be reared in the courts of Emperor Tiberius Caesar, to whom Julia was once married from 11 BC to 6 BC.
Although Tiberius was not the biological father of Claudius, General, he gladly acquiesced to being her foster father in deference to the memory of her late grandfather Caesar Augustus. Pilate arrived in Rome when Claudia was sixteen years of age. In AD 26, the two tied the knot. Needless to say, it was a marriage based not on love as such but on political opportunism.
The high-placed connection who facilitated Pontius Pilate’s smooth landing into the inner sanctums of Rome’s royalty and put him on a pedestal that saw him take pride of place in the cosmic gallery of rogues was Aelius Sejanus. Like Pilate, Sejanus came from the subordinate equestrian class, who would never be eligible for a seat in the Senate, the legislative council of ancient Rome.
Sejanus, however, had over time become Emperor Tiberius’ most trusted lieutenant and to the point where he was the de facto prime minister. He had been commander of the Praetorian Guard, the elite Special Forces unit created by Augustus Caesar as a personal security force, which developed under Sejanus’ command into the most significant presence in Rome.
In AD 26, the emperor was not even based in Rome: he had confined himself to the 10.4 km2 island of Capri, about 264 km from Rome, and left control of Rome and the government of the Roman Empire to Sejanus. It was Sejanus who recommended the appointment of Pilate as prefect, or governor/procurator of Judea. The appointment was pronounced right on the occasion of Pilate’s nuptials with Claudius.
Philo records that when the bridal party emerged from the temple where the marriage ceremony was celebrated and Pilate started to follow the bride into the imperial litter, Tiberius, who was one of the twelve witnesses required to attend the ceremony, held him back and handed him a document. It was the wedding present – the governorship of far-flung Judea – with orders to proceed at once to Caesarea Maritima to take over the office made vacant by the recall of Valerius Gratus.
Pilate was notified by Sejanus that a ship was in fact waiting upon him to transport him to Palestine right away. The only disadvantageous aspect about the assignment was that Pilate was to leave the shores of Rome alone, without the pleasure of spending a first night in the arms of his newly wedded wife: by imperial decree, the wives of governors were not allowed to accompany them in their jurisdictions. Pilate, however, was a royal by marriage and so this prohibition was waived. By special permission granted by His Imperial Majesty Tiberius Caesar, Claudia soon joined her husband in Judea. The wily Pilate had calculated well when he married into royalty.
A SADISTIC ADMINISTRATOR
The Judean perch was not prestigious though, General. The prefects of Judea were not of high social status. At least one – Felix, referenced by Luke in the Acts of the Apostles – was an ex-slave, which says a great deal on the low regard in which the province was held by Rome.
Pilate was only secondarily sent to Judea on account of having married into royalty: his posting to the volatile province stemmed, primarily, from his being of a inferior social pedigree. Be that as it may, Pilate relished the posting in that it gave him the chance to exercise power, absolute power. Absolute power corrupts absolutely and in Pilate was the archetypal example, General.
Pilate’s brief was simple: to collect taxes, maintain law and order, maintain infrastructure, and keep the population subdued. Although he was born lowly, he positively had the power of life and death over his Jewish subjects. Let us, General, listen to Josephus in his allusion to Coponius, Judea’s first Roman governor and who like Pilate was from the same subservient social class: “And now Archelaus’ part of Judea was reduced into a province and Coponius, one of the equestrian order among the Romans, was sent as procurator, having the power of life and death put into his hands by Caesar.”
Pilate, General, was callous to a point of being sadistic. He was scarcely the scrupling judge with the rare soft spot that we encounter in the gospels. Philo charges him with “corruptibility, violence, robberies, ill-treatment of the people, grievances, continuous executions without even the form of a trial, endless and intolerable cruelties”.
He further declares him to be a “savage, inflexible, and arbitrary ruler” who was of a “stubborn and harsh quality” and “could not bring himself to do anything that might cause pleasure to the Jews”. The essentially humane character of the Pilate who presided over the trial of Jesus as portrayed in the gospels may not be wholly fictitious but is highly embellished, General.
Why did Pilate have such a pathological hatred of the Jews, General? Sejanus had more to do with it than the spontaneous leanings of his own nature. According to Philo, Sejanus hated the Jews like the plague and wished “to do away with the nation” – to exterminate it. In AD 19, for instance, he forced the Jews in Rome to burn their religious vestments and expelled them from the city without much ado.
For as long as Sejanus was in power, General, Pilate could do pretty much as he pleased. He didn’t have to worry about compromising reportage reaching the emperor as everything went through the implacably anti-Jewish Sejanus. Sejanus was unrivalled in power: golden statues of the general were being put up in Rome, the Senate had voted his birthday a public holiday, public prayers were offered on behalf of Tiberius and Sejanus, and in AD 31 Sejanus was named as Consul jointly with Tiberius.
The Judea posting also gave Pilate a golden opportunity to make money – lots of it. The governors of the Roman provinces were invariably rapacious, greedy, and incompetent: this we learn not only from Jewish historians of the day but from contemporary Roman writers as well such as Tacitus and Juvenal.
As long as the money skimmed from the provinces was not overly excessive, governors were allowed a free hand. It is said of Emperor Tiberius that, “Once he ordered a governor to reverse a steep rise in taxes saying, ‘I want my sheep shorn, not skinned’!” For those governors, such as Pilate, who had support from the very acmes of Roman power, General, they were practically a law unto themselves.
PILATE’S WINGS ARE CLIPPED
Pontius Pilate, General, was untrained in political office. Furthermore, he was a sycophant to the core who was prepared to go to any length in a bid to curry favour with and prove his loyalty to the powers that be in Rome. Both these attributes gave rise to a series of blunders that brought him the intense hatred of the Jews.
The first abomination he committed in the eyes of the Jews, General, was to set up a temple dedicated to Emperor Tiberius, which he called the Tiberieum, making him the only known Roman official to have built a temple to a living emperor. True, Roman emperors were worshipped, but Tiberius was the one exception. According to the Roman scholar and historian Suetonius, Tiberius did not allow the consecration of temples to himself. Pilate’s act therefore, General, was an overkill: it was not appreciated at all.
Throughout his tenure, General, Pilate had a series of run-ins with the Jews, some of which entailed a lot of bloodshed and one of which sparked an insurrection that paved the way to Calvary. Then it all began to unravel, General. On October 18 AD 31, his patron Sejanus was summoned to the office of Emperor Tiberius and an angry denunciation was read out to him. It is not clear, General, what caused Sejanus’ fall from the emperor’s good graces but circumstantial evidence points to the perceived threat to the emperor’s power.
As the ancient historian Cassius Dio puts it, “Sejanus was so great a person by reason both of his excessive haughtiness and of his vast power that to put it briefly, he himself seemed to be the emperor and Tiberius a kind of island potentate, inasmuch as the latter spent his time on the island of Capri.” Sejanus, hitherto the most powerful man in Rome, General, was thrown into a dungeon.
That same evening, he was summarily condemned to death, extracted from his cell, hung, and had his body given over to a crowd that tore it to pieces in a frenzy of manic excitement. His three children were all executed over the following months and his wife, Tiberius’ own daughter, committed suicide. The people further celebrated his downfall by pulling his statues over. Meanwhile, General, Tiberius began pursuing all those who could have been involved in the “plots” of Sejanus.
In Judea, Pilate, a Sejanus appointee, must have been badly shaken, General. Were his friends and family under suspicion? Would he be purged like others? Imperial attitudes to the Jewish race seemed to have changed now with the riddance of Sejanus. Tiberius made sure this was the case by appointing a new governor for Syria (who went by the title Legate and to whom Pilate was obligated to report).
The governor, Lucius Pomponius Flaccus, arrived in Rome in AD 32. Philo records that Tiberius now “charged his procurators in every place to which they were appointed to speak comfortably to the members of our nation in the different cities, assuring them that the penal measures did not extend to all but only to the guilty who were few, and to disturb none of the established customs but even to regard them as a trust committed to their care, the people as naturally peaceable and the institution as an influence promoting orderly conduct.”
So Pilate, General, had lost his supporters at the top, his new boss was on his doorstep, and there had been a change of policy regarding the very people he was in charge of. Surely, he would have to watch his step. The fact of the matter, however, General, was that he hardly did so. In November 32 AD, for instance, he provoked a mini-uprising by the Zealots led by Judas Iscariot, Theudas Barabbas, and Simon Zelotes. It was this revolt, General, that culminated in those three “crosses” of Calvary that are indelibly etched on the mind of every Christian.
Until as recently as the 1980s a career often meant a job for life within a single company or organisation. Phrases such as ‘climbing the corporate ladder’, ‘the glass ceiling’, ‘wage slave’ & ‘the rat race’ were thrown about, the analogies making clear that a career path was a toxic mix of a war of attrition, indentured drudgery and a Sisyphean treadmill.
In all cases you fought, grafted or plodded on till you reached retirement age, at which point you could expect a small leaving party, the promise of a pension and, oddly, a gift of either a clock or watch. The irony of being rewarded with a timepiece on the very day you could expect to no longer be a workday prisoner was apparently lost on management – the hands of time were destined to follow you to the grave!
Retirement was the goal at the end of the long, corporate journey, time on your hands – verifiable by your gifted time keeping device – to spend time working in the garden, playing with the grandchildren, enjoying a holiday or two and generally killing time till time killed you.
For some, retirement could be literally short-lived. The retirement age, and accompanying pension, was predicated on the old adage of three scores years and ten being the average life expectancy of man. As the twentieth century progressed and healthcare became more sophisticated, that former mean average was extended but that in itself then brought with it the double-edged sword of dementia. The longer people lived, the more widespread dementia became – one more life lottery which some won, some lost and doctors were seemingly unable to predict who would succumb and who would survive.
However, much research has been carried out on the causes of this crippling and cruel disease and the latest findings indicate that one of its root causes may lie in the former workplace – what your job entailed and how stimulating or otherwise it was. It transpires that having an interesting job in your forties could lessen the risk of getting dementia in old age, the mental stimulation possibly staving off the onslaught of the condition by around 18 months.
Academics examined more than 100,000 participants and tracked them for nearly two decades. They spotted a third fewer cases of dementia among people who had engaging jobs which involved demanding tasks and more control — such as government officers, directors, physicians, dentists and solicitors, compared to adults in ‘passive’ roles — such as supermarket cashiers, vehicle drivers and machine operators. And those who found their own work interesting also had lower levels of proteins in their blood that have been linked with dementia.
The study was carried out by researchers from University College London, the University of Helsinki and Johns Hopkins University studying the cognitive stimulation and dementia risk in 107,896 volunteers, who were regularly quizzed about their job. The volunteers — who had an average age of around 45 — were tracked for between 14 and 40 years. Jobs were classed as cognitively stimulating if they included demanding tasks and came with high job control. Non-stimulating ‘passive’ occupations included those with low demands and little decision-making power.
4.8 cases of dementia per 10,000 person years occurred among those with interesting careers, equating to 0.8 per cent of the group. In contrast, there were 7.3 cases per 10,000 person years among those with repetitive jobs (1.2 per cent). Among people with jobs that were in the middle of these two categories, there were 6.8 cases per 10,000 person years (1.12 per cent).
The link between how interesting a person’s work was and rates of dementia did not change for different genders or ages.Lead researcher Professor Mika Kivimaki, from UCL, said: ‘Our findings support the hypothesis that mental stimulation in adulthood may postpone the onset of dementia. The levels of dementia at age 80 seen in people who experienced high levels of mental stimulation was observed at age 78.3 in those who had experienced low mental stimulation. This suggests the average delay in disease onset is about one and half years, but there is probably considerable variation in the effect between people.’
The study, published this week in the British Medical Journal, also looked at protein levels in the blood among another group of volunteers. These proteins are thought to stop the brain forming new connections, increasing the risk of dementia. People with interesting jobs had lower levels of three proteins considered to be tell-tale signs of the condition.
Scientists said it provided ‘possible clues’ for the underlying biological mechanisms at play. The researchers noted the study was only observational, meaning it cannot establish cause and that other factors could be at play. However, they insisted it was large and well-designed, so the findings can be applied to different populations.
To me, there is a further implication in that it might be fair to expect that those in professions such as law, medicine and science might reasonably be expected to have a higher IQ than those in blue collar roles. This could indicate that mental capacity also plays a part in dementia onset but that’s a personal conclusion and not one reached by the study.
And for those stuck in dull jobs through force of circumstance, all is not lost since in today’s work culture, the stimulating side-hustle is fast becoming the norm as work becomes not just a means of financial survival but a life-enhancing opportunity , just as in the old adage of ‘Find a job you enjoy and you’ll never work another day in your life’!
Dementia is a global concern but ironically it is most often seen in wealthier countries, where people are likely to live into very old age and is the second biggest killer in the UK behind heart disease, according to the UK Office for National Statistics. So here’s a serious suggestion to save you from an early grave and loss of competencies – work hard, play hard and where possible, combine the two!
The gospels which were excluded from the official canon, the New Testament, at the Council of Nicaea are known as the Apocrypha. One of these Apocryphal works, General Atiku, is the gospel of Phillip. In this gospel, the intimate relationship between Jesus and Mary Magdalene is openly discussed thus:
“And the companion of the Saviour is Mary Magdalene. But Christ loved her more than all the disciples and used to kiss her often on the mouth. The rest of the disciples were offended by it and expressed disapproval. They said unto him, why do you love her more than all of us? The Saviour answered and said to them, why do I not love you like her? … Great is the mystery of marriage, for without it the world would never have existed. Now, the existence of the world depends on man, and the existence of man on marriage.”
It is clear from the above statement, General, that Jesus held marriage in high regard because he himself was part and parcel of it. The disciples (that is, most of them) were offended not because he and Mary were an item but because they simply did not approve of her as she was a Gentile and a commoner.
Otherwise, the kissing was not offensive at all: it was a customary expression of mutual affection between the sacred bride and groom. This we gather from the prototypically romantic Old Testament text known as The Song of Solomon, which opens with the words, “Let him kiss me with the kisses of his mouth: for thy love is better than wine.” As the Davidic groom, Jesus was therefore entitled to kiss Mary Magdalene as his bride.
THE FIRST MARRIAGE
In September AD 30, General Atiku, Jesus and Mary Magdalene had their First Marriage ceremony. Jesus had turned 36 in that year, the appropriate marriage age for a Davidic heir, and September was the holiest month in the Jewish calendar. Having been born irregularly himself (in the wrong month of the year because of his father Joseph’s intransigence), Jesus was determined that he himself follow the law to the letter so that his child would not suffer the same indignities as he did. The First Marriage is captured in LUKE 7:35-50.
The marriage took place at the home of Simon the Pharisee. This, General, was another name for Simon Zelotes, the stepfather of Mary Magdalene. Although Mary Magdalene is not directly named, she is described as a “sinner”. This was another term for Gentiles, as in the eyes of the Jewish God, they were unregenerate and therefore hopeless sinners. Mary Magdalene, whose mother Helena-Salome was of Syrian origin (Syro-Phoenicia to be specific), was a Gentile.
On the occasion, Mary Magdalene performed three acts on Jesus as set out in LUKE 7:38. She wept; kissed his feet; and anointed him with ointment. This is what a bride was supposed to do to her groom as clearly evinced in The Song of Solomon, a series of love poems concerning a spouse and her husband the King.
Of the three rites, perhaps it is the weeping that require elucidation, General. This was at once symbolic and sentimental. The First Marriage was simply a ceremony: the moment the ceremony was over, the husband and wife separated, that is, they lived apart until the month of December, when they came together under one roof. This was in accord with Essene stipulations for dynastic marriages, that is, those of the Davidic Messiah and the priestly Messiah.
Prior to the First Marriage, the bride was known as an Almah, meaning a betrothed Virgin. After the First Marriage ceremony, the Almah was demoted to a Sister. This was because the ensuing three-month separation meant husband and wife would not indulge in sexual activity and so the wife was as good as a sister to her husband. The imagery of Sister also being a wife is seen in 1 CORINTHIANS 9:5, where the apostle Paul refers to his wife as Sister. In ACTS 23:16, Paul’s wife is again referred to as his Sister.
Now, when the Almah became a Sister, General, she was metaphorically called a Widow, because she was being separated from her newly wedded husband. As such, she was expected to symbolically weep on account of this separation. That explains why Mary Magdalene had to weep at her first wedding. It is a pity, General, that most Christians and their clergy miss the real story so wrongly indoctrinated are they.
In December AD 30, Jesus moved in with Mary Magdalene to consummate the marriage. It was hoped that Mary would fall pregnant so that in March the following year, a Second (and final) Marriage ceremony would be held. Sadly, conception did not take place. According to Essene dynastic procreational rules, the couple had to separate again. They would reunite in December AD 31 for another try at conception.
The reason they separated was because for a dynastic heir, marriage was purely for procreation and not for recreational sex. But even that year, General, Mary did not fall pregnant, necessitating another year-long separation. What that meant was that Mary would be given one more last chance – in December AD 32, by which time Jesus would have been 38. If she did not conceive this time around, the marriage would come to an end through a legal divorce and Jesus would be free to seek a new spouse.
THE FINAL MARRIAGE
In December 32, Mary Magdalene, General, finally conceived. When Jesus was crucified therefore in April 33 AD, his wife was three months pregnant. By this time, the Second Marriage ceremony, the final one, had already taken place, this being in March. The Second Marriage is cursorily related in MATTHEW 26:6-13; MARK 14:3-9; and JOHN 12:1-8.The John version reads as follows:
“Jesus, therefore, six days before the Passover, came to Bethany, where was Lazarus, who had died, whom he raised out of the dead; they made, therefore, to him a supper there, and Martha was ministering, and Lazarus was one of those reclining together (at meat) with him; Mary, therefore, having taken a pound of ointment of spikenard, of great price, anointed the feet of Jesus and did wipe with her hair his feet, and the house was filled from the fragrance of the ointment.
Therefore said one of his disciples – Judas Iscariot, of Simon, who was about to deliver him up – ‘Therefore was not this ointment sold for three hundred denaries, and given to the poor?’ and he said this, not because he was caring for the poor, but because he was a thief, and had the bag, and what things were put in he was carrying. Jesus, therefore, said, ‘Suffer her; for the day of my embalming she has kept it, for the poor you have always with yourselves, and me you have not always.’”
This story (also see JOHN 11:1-44) centres on four people primarily, General. They are Jesus; Lazarus; Mary; and Martha. “Mary” was actually Mary Magdalene. “Martha” was a titular name for her mother, Helena-Salome. In the Lazarus story, the two ladies are referred to as “sisters”. This denotes conventual sisters, like the Catholics refer to conventual nuns, and not sisters by blood. Helena-Salome actually headed a nunnery. By the same token, the reference to Lazarus as “brother” has a connotation akin to what Pentecostals refer to as “Brother in Christ”.
Thus, the story revolves around Jesus the groom; his bride Mary Magdalene; his father-in-law Simon Zelotes; and his mother-in-law Helena-Salome. This is a family affair folks, which provides strong hints as to the exact relationship between Jesus and Mary. The raising from the dead of a man called Lazarus, sadly, was not a miracle at all: it was a ceremonial restoration from excommunication back to the Essene governing council, which comprised of Jesus and his so-called 12 disciples.
The “Lazarus” who was thus restored was actually Simon Zelotes, at the time the most “beloved” by Jesus of the entire apostolic band, who had been demoted under circumstances relating to a Zealot uprising against Pontius Pilate. More will be said on the subject at a later stage.
The anointing of Jesus by Mary with “spikenard”, General, harps back to ancient married rituals as patently demonstrated in The Song of Solomon. This was the second time Mary had anointed Jesus, first at the First Marriage in September AD 30 AD and now at the Second Marriage in March 32 AD. On both occasions, Mary anointed Jesus whilst he sat at table.
In SONG OF SOLOMON 1:12, the bride says, “While the King sitteth at his table, my spikenard sendeth forth the smell thereof”. The anointing in the gospels was therefore an allusion to the ancient rite whereby a royal bride prepared her groom’s table. Only as the wife of Jesus and as a priestess in her own right could Mary Magdalene have anointed both the feet and head of Jesus.
The anointing in effect had two purposes: first, to seal the marriage, and second, to officially announce to the Jewish nation that Jesus was the Davidic Messiah (and not his younger brother James, who had been so promoted by John the Baptist). It all harped back to the tradition in ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia, where Kings or Pharaohs were anointed for office (in their case with crocodile fat) by their half-sister brides.
The King’s bride actually kept the anointment substance for use for one more time – when the King died. You can now understand, General, why Jesus said “the day of my embalming she has kept it” in reference to his anointing by Mary Magdalene and why the first person to feature at the tomb of Jesus was none other than Mary Magdalene!
Three passages in the Lazarus story (in JOHN11: 1-44) are particularly telling. They are Verses 20, 28, and 29. They read as follows: “When Martha heard that Jesus was coming, she went out to meet him, but Mary stayed in the house … After Martha said this, she went back and called her sister Mary privately. ‘The Master is here,’ she told her, ‘and is asking for you.’ When Mary heard this, she got up and hurried out to meet him.” The reason Mary (Magdalene) first kept her place before proceeding to meet Jesus, General, is not supplied in the Johannine gospel.
However, the Apocryphal document which has come to be known as The Secret Gospel of Mark sheds more light, General. It explains that on the first occasion, Mary did come out to meet Jesus along with her mother Martha (Helena-Salome) but upon being rebuked by the disciples of Jesus, she repaired back to the house. Why was she lashed out at, General? Because according to the Essene matrimonial code, she was not permitted to come out of her own accord and greet her husband: she was to wait until he had given her express permission to emerge.
There is yet another element in the conduct of Mary Magdalene that has parallels with Solomon’s queen, General. In the back-and-forth romantic dialogue between the couple, the queen is referred to as a “Shulamite” (SONG OF SOLOMON 6:13). The Shulamites were from the Syrian border town of Solam and we have already seen that Mary’s first foster father, Syro the Jairus, was a Syrian, as was her mother Helena-Salome.
JUDAS DENOUNCES THE MARRIAGE
The marriage of Jesus to Mary Magdalene was vehemently opposed by most of his so-called disciples. The most vociferous on this position, General, was Judas Iscariot. The writer of the John gospel characterises Judas as a “thief” who used to pilfer alms money but that is a smear. The gospels were written post-eventual and therefore Judas’ name was already in ignominy.
His detractors therefore had a field day at sullying his character. Yet prior to the betrayal, Judas Iscariot, General, was one of the most respected figures among the Essene community. At the time of Jesus’ marriage, Judas was the second-highest ranking Essene after Simon Zelotes (that is the meaning of “Judas of Simon” in the passage quoted above, meaning “Judas the deputy of Simon”): Jesus was third, although politically he was the seniormost.
Judas opposed the marriage on grounds, primarily, that Mary Magdalene was not only a Gentile but a commoner. Judas had the right to pronounce on Jesus’ marriage because it was he who was in charge of the Essene’s order of Dan, to which Mary Magdalene belonged prior to her marriage to Jesus and therefore had the right whether to release her for marriage or retain her in the convent. Judas would rather the spikenard (the most expensive fragrance of the day, the reason it was only used by queens) was sold and the money generated donated to the Essene kitty (“the poor” was another name for Essenes: when Jesus in the Beatitudes said “blessed are the poor”, he was not referring to you and me: he meant the Essenes).
Sadly General, as high-standing as he was, Judas had no right of veto over the marriage of a Davidic heir: only Simon Zelotes had by virtue of his position as the Essene’s Pope. Simon Zelotes was Mary Magdalene’s step-father and there was no way he was going to stand in the way of the marriage of his own daughter. Moreover, Jesus had already begun to fancy himself as Priest-King.
As far as he was concerned therefore, he was at once the Davidic Messiah and the Priestly Messiah – the Melchizedek. Thus even if Simon Zelotes had perchance objected to the marriage, Jesus would have gone ahead with it anyway. It was Jesus’ highly unpopular appropriated role as the Melchizedek, General, that set him on the path to Calvary.