Teaching Letters

A MONTHLY TEACHING LETTER

Letter #17

This is the seventeenth in a series of teaching letters. With this lesson, we shall continue with the much neglected and ignored story of the Zerah branch of Judah. I started this phase of the Zerah-Judah narration with lesson #13. You will need lessons #13 through 16 to comprehend the entire story that has been introduced thus far. In the last two lessons we have been considering the Roman emperor Constantine the Great, and how he fits into history. I was hoping to complete the account of Constantine with the last lesson, but there remain some very important, momentous facts about him that demand our very keen and avid attention! I believe, once these astounding, true realities are contemplated, you will never ever look on Constantine in the same manner again.

Now Continuing The Topic:

JUST WHO IS THIS PATRIARCH, JUDAH? (Part 17)

CONSTANTINE’S ACTIONS HAD FAR-REACHING EFFECTS IN BABYLON

As a consequence of the first Ecumenical or General Council of Nicaea (A.D. 325) Constantine’s actions were experienced for the better in Babylon. For this portion of the account of Constantine, we will go to The Story Of Civilization, Part (volume) 1, “Our Oriental Heritage”, by Will Durant, pages 245-246 (First Durant quotes the historian Herodotus as follows.):

“Every native woman (in Babylon) is obliged, once in her life, to sit in the temple of Venus, and have intercourse with some stranger. And many disdaining to mix with the rest, being proud on account of their wealth, come in covered carriages, and take up their station at the temple with a numerous train of servants attending them. But the far greater part do thus: many sit down in the temple of Venus, wearing a crown of cord round their heads; some are continually coming in, and others are going out. Passages marked out in a straight line lead in every direction through the women, along which strangers pass and make their choice. When a woman has once seated herself she must not return home till some stranger has thrown a piece of silver into her lap, and lain with her outside the temple. He who throws the silver must say thus: ‘I beseech the goddess Mylitta to favor thee’; for the Assyrians call Venus Mylitta. The silver may be ever so small, for she will not reject it, inasmuch as it is not lawful for her to do so, for such silver is accounted sacred. The woman follows the first man that throws, and refuses no one. But when she has had intercourse and has absolved herself from her obligation to the goddess, she returns home; and after that time, however great a sum you may give her you will not gain possession of her. …”

(Back now to Durant’s comments about these women on the same pages): Such women, of course, were not [considered] prostitutes. But various classes of prostitutes lived within the temple precincts, plied their trade there, and amassed, some of them, great fortunes. Such temple prostitutes were common in western Asia: we find them in Israel, Phrygia, Phœnicia, Syria, etc.; in Lydia and Cyprus the girls earned their marriage dowries in this way. ‘Sacred prostitution’ continued in Babylonia until abolished by Constantine (ca, 325 A.D.). Alongside it, in the wine-shops kept by women, secular prostitution flourished.

You can be certain, if the sacred prostitution was legally discontinued by Constantine, the Babylonian law requiring the women to yield to an absolute stranger (probably of most any racial background) once in her lifetime, was legally halted also. This story speaks volumes about Constantine’s character. This was a very difficult period in history, resulting in many false doctrines being introduced into the church by the early church fathers, and Constantine found himself right in the middle of it. Paganism had overwhelmed the Roman Empire as a direct result of the wars of Alexander the Great. This is another story, and will have to be treated separately.

CONSTANTINE’S CONVERSION A DEATH-KNELL TO MARCIONISM

I don’t really have the time, at this point, to go into depth on the doctrines and tenets of Marcion, except to say they were not good. To engage in the subject of Marcion would require a separate comprehensive study in itself. This man did a tremendous amount of damage to the church and impaired the Word of Yahweh beyond description during the second century A.D. Some of his mischief remains with us today in the form of scriptural canon. Many of his misdeeds were later picked up and enlarged upon by the Roman Catholic Universal Church. In the book, Forerunners And Rivals Of Christianity From 330 B.C. To 330 A.D., by Francis Legge, volume 2, page 220, says this:

The conversion of Constantine put a violent end to any open propagation of the doctrines of Marcion or his successors. In the picturesque words of Eusebius ‘the lurking-places of the heretics were broken up by the Emperor’s commands, and the savage beasts which they harboured were put to flight.’

CONSTANTINE ISSUES GENERAL REFORMS

Upon coming to power in both the eastern and western parts of the Roman Empire, Constantine made several reforms that are notable, other than those of a religious nature. Anyone making such reforms, in any period of time, would be deserving of much praise. The Encyclopedia Americana, ©1948, volume 7, under the topic “Constantine I” pages 554-555, has this to say:

Many beneficial decrees were proclaimed by him. Among these were those which abolished all the establishments of debauchery, ordered the children of the poor to be supported at his expense, gave permission to complain of his officers and promised that the Emperor would not only hear complaints, but compensate the complainants for injuries received, when they were proved to exist. He diminished the land-taxes and caused a new valuation of estates to be taken. The state treasury had always been enriched by the property of criminals; but Constantine spared the property of their wives and ameliorated (improved) the condition of their children. Death in prison, he said, was a cruel punishment for the innocent, and an insufficient penalty for the guilty; he therefore ordered all trials of prisoners to take place at once. He forbade the use of unwholesome dungeons and oppressive chains. He gave leave to sick persons, widows and orphans to appeal from the local magistrates, and refused this privilege to their adversaries. It had been customary for the heirs of a person deceased to divide his slaves among them; Constantine forbade the separation in these cases of husbands from their wives and of parents from their children. To the Christians he gave permission not only to erect churches, but to be remunerated for the cost of them from his domains.

CONSTANTINE FORBIDS “JEWS” TO LIVE IN JERUSALEM OR TO MAKE CONVERTS AMONG SLAVES

Constantine further made it illegal for the “Jews” to reside in Jerusalem, and also to endeavor to make converts of slaves. Constantine’s son, emperor Constantius II followed up his father with even stricter more demanding laws pertaining to the Jews. For this interesting information I will quote from the, History Of The Jews, by Heinrich Graetz, volume 2, pages 564 and 567:

The first utterance of Christianity on the very day of its victory [by Constantine] betrayed its hostile attitude towards the Jews, and gave rise to those malignant decrees of Constantine and his successors, which laid the foundation of the bloody persecutions of subsequent centuries. Constantine re-enacted — undoubtedly at the instigation of the clergy — the law of Hadrain which forbade the Jews to live in Jerusalem. Only on the anniversary of the destruction of the city were they allowed, on making certain payments to the officials, to mourn on the ruins of the Temple. The clergy further succeeded in obtaining a law from Constantine prohibiting the Jews from making converts among the slaves. Christianity claimed the monopoly of expansion, and forbade Judaism to increase its influence either by making proselytes or by converting its slaves. …

The sentiment of hostility, nourished by Constantius against the Jews, also manifested itself in several laws concerning them. The causes of this persecution remain involved in complete obscurity, and it is impossible to ascertain whether the apostate Joseph, that second Acher, was in any way connected therewith. Marriages between Jews and Christian women, which appear to have been of not infrequent occurrence, were punished with death under the emperor Constantius (A.D. 339). Of even greater consequence was the law concerning slaves which was promulgated by him. Whereas his father [emperor Constantine] had only forbidden the admission of slaves into the Jewish community, and had simply punished the transgression of this prohibition by declaring forfeited all slaves so admitted, Constantius decreed (A.D. 339) that the circumcision of a Christian slave entailed the pain of death and the entire loss of fortune. He even forbade the reception of heathen slaves into the covenant of Judaism. The grounds for this law were twofold: it was desired that Judaism should receive no increase through its adoption by slaves, and also that Christians should not serve Jewish masters, ‘the assassins of God.’ This preposterous view has been held by the Church ever since, and prevails even at the present day.

LAST, AND MOST IMPORTANT OF ALL, CONSTANTINE WAS A PURE-BLOOD OF THE TRIBE OF JUDAH

Yes, Constantine was of the royal line of Judah on both sides of his house. He, therefore, was a descendant of Judah and Tamar. What does this have to do with the story of Constantine?!?!?! IT HAS EVERYTHING TO DO WITH THE STORY OF CONSTANTINE, FOR HE WAS OF JUDAH! Not only this, Constantine was of the House of David on his mother’s side. I will repeat it again, Judah owned the septre, and Constantine, like Good King Lucius, knew how to employ it! Constantine had all the necessary qualities of a leader built right into him; that is the reason he was so outstanding in everything he put his hand to, a cool, intelligent, levelheaded, natural born leader; man for his hour. For verification on Constantine’s background, I will now quote from, Our Neglected Heritage, volume 2, “The Hidden Centuries”, by Gladys Taylor, pages 46-47. (Notice when she uses the word “Dardanian”, as it is derived from the name Darda, a descendant of Judah, found in 1 Kings 4:31.):

A turning point was reached when Constantius Chlorus was appointed as ruler of the provinces of Gaul and Britain. In A.D. 293, he was adopted by the Emperor Maximian and appointed Caesar. He was born in Illyria and had distinguished himself in his ‘able and gentle rule’ of the province of Dalmatia. He seems to have had an affinity with the Celts of Gaul and Britain and was popular in the western Empire.

It is interesting to note that, by ancestry, he came of a noble Dardanian family, which means he was most probably of Trojan stock, like the British royal family. Further point is given to this racial origin by the surname given to him by the Romans, ‘Chlorus’, which means ‘pale’ or ‘fair.’

On the abdication of Diocletian and Maximian, in 305, he became supreme ruler with the title “Augustus’, a position which was inherited by his son Constantine a few years later.

The outstanding achievement of Constantius, from our point of view, was the ending of the terrible Diocletian persecution of the Christians, which was wreaking havoc in Britain as well as on the Continent. Apart from the unusual leniency of his rule, it would seem that Constantius must have had some interest, at least, in the Christian faith. Perhaps this was due to the influence of his British wife, Helena, the daughter of King Cole II, ruler of eastern England from his capital, Colchester.

It would be unwise to judge the reigns of either Constantius [Chlorus] or his son, Constantine the Great, by mere superficial appearances. The facts recorded are sparse and sometimes contradictory. We have to feel our way through this jungle of expressed opinions, both from their friends and enemies trying to assess which statements are most logically fitting to the circumstances of the time. …

BEWARE OF EDWARD GIBBON’S HISTORY OF THE DECLINE AND FALL OF THE

ROMAN EMPIRE ACCOUNT OF HELENA, CONSTANTINE’S MOTHER!

I don’t know why, but whenever I attempt to research to find something in Gibbon’s History Of The Decline And Fall Of The Roman Empire it seems that I am unable to find anything worthwhile of his to quote. I have searched his work several times on various subjects to find something to contribute to my writings, and I usually come up empty-handed. On this matter of Gibbons, I would like to quote what Gladys Taylor has to say about him on page 53 of her book, Our Neglected Heritage, volume 2, “The Hidden Centuries”:

The early British historians, at least until the seventeen century, always obtained their information aboutHelena from the British, mainly the Welsh records and genealogies. It was when Edward Gibbon, after a prolonged visit to Rome, wrote his History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, that he passed on the Roman fiction of Helena’s birth in an innkeeper’s family at the small town of Naissus in the Balkans.

If the Roman Church wants to propagate a theory, the slenderest and weakest piece of evidence will be blown up, with the addition of spurious miracles, to serve the purpose. In spite of all the evidences in favour of theBritish Prince Linus being the first Bishop of Rome, the Church of Rome has gone to great lengths to prevent British people [from] knowing this truth. This began before the Reformation, but continued with even greater intensity afterwards. In the same way, the fact that the mother of the first Christian emperor was a British Princess was a bitter pill to swallow. The fact that the nation that Rome wanted others to despise had been responsible for so much of the early history of the Church was too much for proud Rome to bear. While in Rome, Gibbon could have learned something of the truth, but he evidently listened to the prepared propaganda. Since his day, other historians and encyclopedias have slavishly copied Gibbon. This would not have mattered if they had also been fair enough to quote earlier historians with contrary views, but the encyclopedias, at least, completely ignore all British references.

ONE ENCYCLOPEDIA GETS IT RIGHT

Maybe there are more than one, but the following encyclopedia is the only one that I am aware of which does an excellent job of presenting the facts about Constantine’s family background. From the articles under the title “Constantine”, The Encyclopedia Americana, ©1948, volume 8, pages 420-421, we get the following information (This will be a lengthy quotation, but the information is very important and will bring us up-to-date. I will underline the most crucial parts):

DALMATIA, … (Slav Dalmacija,) Yugoslavia, a strip of land along the northeastern coast of the Adriatic Sea, some 210 miles in length and averaging about 35 miles in width, which with its important adjacent islands has a total area of 4,923 square miles. Formerly part of the kingdom of Croatia, (q.v.) and afterwards a semiautonomous crown land of the Austrian Empire, it became in 1918 part of the Serb, Croat and SloveneState, later Yugoslavia (q.v.).

Most of Dalmatia is protected along the northwest side by the Dinaric Alps, and because of this has a pleasant climate all the year round. Frosts very seldom occur, and in summer the breeze from the sea keeps the air cool. Although the soil was formed largely from the unfertile karst (porous limestone), it has been made productive through many centuries of hard human labor. The farmers still concentrate most of their efforts on such relatively high-paying crops as grapes, subtropical fruits, and tobacco. Because of the abundant sunshine, Dalmat wines are famous, but are not exported in very great quantities since each district specializes in its own brand, for which it has a limited number of patrons. There are nearly 4,000,000 olive trees, but the methods used in processing olive oil are still primitive, and most of the oil is exported to Italy, to be refined and marketed there. Dalmatia grows excellent sour cherries (marasca cherries) for export. and specializes in the cultivation of pyrethrum — the camphor-yielding plant. Figs and carobs (St.-John’s bread) are raised for home consumption. Fishing is a very important industry, giving employment to more than 30,000 men in over 7,000 fishing boats, the annual catch averaging about 1,500,000 tons. Before World War II there were only about 20 fish-canning plants, yet Dalmatian sardines, packed in natural olive oil, have a distinctive flavor and are easily marketed. In medieval times, when the mountains were covered with heavy timber, Dalmatia was the center of the shipping industry in the Mediterranean, supplying boats for all countries. Zadar (Zara). population (1936) 12,838, became the capital; but Split (Spalato), estimated population (1945) 43,808 was for centuries the cultural and commercial center of Dalmatia. Other important cities with populations for 1931, are Sibenik (Sebenico), 37,284; Trogir, 23,468; and Dubrovnik (Ragusa), 18,767.

History

The Dalmats, a branch of the Slavs, moving westward from the Black Sea region, reached the shore of the Adriatic Sea about 450 B.C. Here they found people of similar stock who called themselves Illyrs. (Meaning Elohim people — documented comment mine.)

Pre-Christian Settlements and the Roman Conquest of Dalmat Cities.— The Dalmats settled north of the Illyrs and built a fort (Dimal), but did not molest the Greek cities and harbors which they found in that area. Like other Slavs, the Dalmats were organized in clans, and the head of each clan was called the pan (hence the modern terms “ban” (q.v.), “banat” and “banovina”), and the continued use by the Czechs and Poliaks of pan in the same sense as the English “Mr.” In 278 B.C., a leader named Demetrius declared himself supreme ban of all the Slavs and Illyrs. In 205 B.C., Agron, king of the Illyrs, was recognized as king of theDalmats and Slavs. The Romans who knew him as a pirate, sent two emissaries in 200 B.C. to protest against his depredations. By that time Agron was dead, but his widow Teuta beheaded the ambassadors. Rome then sent a punitive army which in 182 B.C. took the island of Pharos (Pharia, modern Hvar) and destroyed the fortress of Dimal. Dalmatia was subjected by Rome in 6 B.C., during the reign of Augustus (r. 27 B.C.-14 A.D.). Rome never conquered all Dalmatia, confining its sway to a few cities and towns along the main road. The Dalmats remained under their native rulers, and so long as they did not attack Roman-held cities they were left in peace.

From the Introduction of Christianity to the Union with Croatia.— The Dalmats were the first people(outside of Britain — comment mine) to adopt Christianity, receiving it from St. Paul (about 67 A.D.), who when shipwrecked on the island of Melita (modern Mljet), in 54 A.D., preached at Salona (Solin), now in ruins. He founded a diocese there installing Bishop Vinatius of Hvar. A new wave of Slavs must have arrived inDalmatia about the year 375 A.D., since the old chronicles say that “Radigost came from Scythia with a great army and became the strong ruler of all the Slavs in 400 A.D.” Then the Huns invaded Dalmatia, but were defeated by the Slavs in 470. By 525 the Dalmats succeeded in establishing an orderly state under Selimir, but five of his successors persecuted the Christians. In 639 Radimir conquered the cities of Zadar, Sibenik (Sebenico), Trogir, and Solin. Solin was destroyed in 615 during an invasion by the Avars, and the people moved into the abandoned palace of the Roman Emperor Diocletian (r. 284-305 A.D.), around which arose the city of Split. Svetimir liberated all the Christians and in 745 his son Budimir became the first Christian ruler of Dalmatia and the Croats. In northern Dalmatia the Franks ruled for nearly 100 years, from 776 to 871. But from the time of Budimir, southern Dalmatia and ultimately all of the country was closely connected with Croatia, and the two states ultimately merged, when Tomislav (r. as king, 910-928), who had been head of both, became the first recognized ruler of the united kingdom. From 1102 to 1918 Croatia and Hungary were ruled jointly by the Hungarian kings, Croatia retaining its identity, however. But in 1867 Dalmatiabecame a semiautonomous province of Austria.

During the intervening centuries, Dalmatia had its own colorful history. When the Republic of St. Mark (Venice) was at its height, many Dalmat cities joined it in order to find protection against the pirates, of whom there were many along the coast. The ranks of these marauders were swelled by the populations of the whole districts, which during the reigns of weak rulers declared themselves independent, and took to piracy. The city of Dubrovnik, known also as Ragusa, became a republic in its own right, but turned to trade instead of to piracy. During medieval times it became the cultural center of the Yugoslavs. Dubrovnik managed to keep its independence for centuries, until the period following the Battle of Austerlitz (Dec. 2, 1805), when Austria was forced to cede Dalmatia and Istria to Napoleon as a prelude to further concessions, and his troops took over the small republic, which was included for a time with his “Illyrian Provinces.”

Dalmatia Becomes a Crown Land of Austria.— In 1814 the congress of Vienna gave Dalmatia (including Dubrovnik) to Austria. After the fall of Napoleon’s Illyria, the Dalmats demanded union with Croatia, but Austria refused this demand, giving the ban of Croatia instead the empty title of “Ban of Croatia, Slavonia and Dalmatia.” During the reorganization of the Dual Monarchy (1867), Dalmatia became a crown land of Austria, with a degree of local autonomy. It had a Diet, and was entitled to send 11 deputies to the Reichsrat in Vienna. The overwhelming majority of the Dalmats are Catholics and profess to be Croats. Adherents of the Orthodox Church prefer to be known as Serbs. The ratio between the two is best shown from the fact that of the 11 deputies sent to the Reichsrat, 9 were Croats and 2 Serbs. Italy claimed Dalmatia; yet there were not enough Italian votes to elect a single deputy. Despite this fact, Austria made Italian the prevailing language of the administration, the courts, and the city schools.

Dalmatia and Yugoslav Unity.— Since medieval times the Dalmats have been among the most conscious of the Yugoslav peoples in their efforts to promote Yugoslav unity. During World War I, Dalmats figured prominently in the Yugoslav Committee in London which demanded that Dalmatia be united with Serbia. Dr. Ante Trumbic (1864-1938) the Dalmat leader, made a contract with Nikola Pasic, premier of Serbia, embodying definite plans for the organization of a new state. Authorities on Yugoslav history between the wars attribute much of the subsequent dissatisfaction in Yugoslavia, and the eventual collapse of the state to a failure — especially on the part of certain Serbian political leaders — in putting this control into effect.During World War II, Dalmatia, in proportion to its population, contributed the largest quota of fighters to the liberation forces under Marshal Tito.

I hope you observed the use of the name “Zara” or “Zadar” as the name of a city in the above quoted article toward the bottom of page 4. There is no doubt in my mind that this name is derived from the name of the Zerah branch of Judah because of Zerahites occupying that area. An alternate spelling for Zerah is: Zarah or Zara. There was also quoted the name of a city by the name of “Trogir” which, no doubt, is derived from the name Trojan. All the evidence appears to point to the reality that Emperor Constantine was a pure blooded descendent of Judah and Tamar through both Zerah and Pharez. Constantine’s genealogy was, then, what gave him the ability to accomplish all the phenomenal things which he did. It just came natural to him.

You will also notice, by the last quoted article immediately above, from The Encyclopedia Americana, ©1948, volume 8, pages 420-421, that the Dalmatia spoken of, is the same general geographic area which President Clinton ordered, along with the NATO aligned nations to be bombed this spring and early summer. It would appear that some of these people being bombed may be the same people as Zerah Judah. In other words, they may be bombing Tamar’s grandchildren. What do you think of that? Because of its complicated history, we cannot be sure how many of Zerah-Judah, if any, may still reside in that area. As the “Slavs form a language group rather than a race” (The World Book Encyclopedia, volume 17, page 414), we cannot be sure who the peoples of that area are today. Therefore, not all Slavic speaking people are Slavs, and not all Slavs are Israelites. You simply cannot categorize all Slavs into one group. The subject of the Slavs is another topic that needs a lot of study. Because of the Hunnic and Turkish invasions, the populations the Bulkans have changed drastically. The racial stock in the old Dalmatia area is quite different today than it was in the day Constantius Chlorus.

We know there were Zerahites in the Balkans as late as the fourth century according to Our Neglected Heritage, volume 2, “The Hidden Centuries” by Gladys Taylor, which she speaks of on page 12 as follows:

Another first-century missionary was Mansuetus, an Irishman, baptized in A.D. 40 and martyred in the year 89. He travelled to France and joined Clement, Bishop of Rome, being appointed Bishop of Lotharingia (Lorraine), in eastern France, in the year 49. He travelled even further east to Illyria, in the western Balkans, preaching to a Gothic people, another branch of our own race, who possessed the Bible in their own tongue as early as the fourth century, translated by their Bishop Wulfilas.

I think it is quite interesting to observe, the satanic serpent seed in the personages of Madeline Albright, James Rubin and others are the ones calling all the shots in this war. It would seem these “Jews” have a vested interest in it’s outcome. Just what kind of a war do we have going on here? It would appear that it is a war of the false Judeans trying to destroy the true Judeans. In fact, it is the same old war of Genesis 3:15. Therefore, those who don’t understand the Two Seed-line doctrine cannot fathom this war. Those one seed-liners promoting the idea that the war of Genesis 3:15 is the “seed” of the spirit at enmity with the “seed” of the flesh, can in no way comprehend what this present war is all about. In fact, they fail to grasp about 90% of what the entire Bible is all about. It appears that the “Jewish” policy for the Balkans is the same as in other White countries — to force the different ethnic groups to live together so they can intermarry and inbreed thereby downgrading and destroying the White race (at least what few there may be left in that area).

WHERE ROME WENT WRONG!

It was not Constantine’s fault that Rome went wrong during the years of the Christian persecutions (and there were ten of them), or during the founding of the Roman Catholic Universal Church, or during the time of the Holy Roman Empire which followed. At this time, I could go into depth and show you how Rome had been importing paganism since the time of Alexander the Great. As Rome sent out her soldiers in conquest all over the then known world, when the soldiers returned home they brought back with them various forms of paganism as war souvenirs, so to speak. Thus Rome became the harbor, capital and stronghold of every known false and unclean religion of the world. Although these false religions did not contribute to the welfare of Rome, they were not the basic cause of Rome’s ultimate failure. The underlying reason for Rome’s eventual failure was in her law system. To comprehend how all of this happened, concerning her laws, it is essential to return to some history from the time of the Trojans. For this history, I will quote from, Our Neglected Heritage, volume 3, “The Magnet of The Isles”, by Gladys Taylor, pages 28-30:

After the fall of Troy, the royal house of Dardanos was divided and scattered. Caesar claimed descent from Aeneas and Virgil wrote the Aeneid to proclaim this fact. From Ascanius Julius, son of Aeneas and Creusa, daughter of Priam King of Troy, came the Julian family of Rome and also Brutus the Trojan, grandson of Ascanius, who gathered together a band of Trojan exiles, soon after the fall of Troy and traveled westward to Britain. This could have been a considerable migration. From a wealth of Greek and Latin literature dealing with the departure of the Trojans, notably the Trojan Cycle, listed by Procus in the second century A.D., we gather that Aeneas departed from Mount Ida with 88,000 Trojans and built a fleet of 332 vessels. We leave Aeneas in Italy and follow Brutus and his companions to Britain.

At Totnes, in Devon, where the Brutus Stone is preserved, tradition tells us that it was the pedestal of the Palladium at Troy, brought here by one Geryon the Augur (prophet) who came with Brutus. The presence of this stone on which, for many centuries, the Mayors of Totnes have proclaimed the accession of kings, is certainly interesting. The Palladium at Troy, a small figure of Pallas Athene, was sacred to the Trojans. It was their talisman. When Odysseus captured it, that was the ultimate insult. If the exiles wanted to take something to remind them of Troy, what better than the pedestal, since they could not have the Palladium itself.

The ninth century Historia Britonum of Nennius and, most notably, the Welsh chronicle Brut, both deal with the coming of Brutus and his foundation of London under the name of Trinovantium, or Caer Troia in the British tongue. Sir William Blackstone, in his Commentaries on the Laws of England, deals with Brutus as our first lawgiver, ‘Brutus the first king of this land, as soon as he had settled himself in his kingdom, for the safe and peaceable government of his people, wrote a book in the Greek tongue calling it the laws of Britons, and he collected the same out of the laws of the Trojans. This king died, … before the incarnation of Christ 1,103 years, Samuel then being judge of Israel.’

Links with Bible history are also given in Brut, and a mysterious reference to the giving of ‘privilege’ to the city, something which seems to have been continued by successive monarchs ever since: ‘When Brutus had finished the building of the city, and had strengthened it with walls and castles, he consecrated them and made inflexible laws for the government of such as should dwell therein peaceably, and he put protection on the city and granted privilege to it. At this time Beli the priest ruled in Judea and the Ark of the Covenant was in captivity to the Philistines.’

We know no more of the Laws of the Trojans than we know of the laws established by Cecrops or the Minoan laws, but it is interesting to see that they formed part of the most civilizing influences of antiquity and governed men noted for their wisdom and the reasonableness of their dealings, in each case. We know that the Romans sent to Greece for their laws, but altered them to suit the Roman mind. We have no record of the actual laws used by the Celts of France, but we do know from Caesar that they were written in the Greek tongue.

The codification of law occurs frequently in history, but this does not mean the introduction of revolutionary changes. The new code is merely the adaptation of original principles to the changing conditions of life.

There is an equilibrium in English Common Law which is hard to explain unless we do so in terms of Divine Law. The same principles of justice and right dealing are there every time the law is codified. There seems to be a remarkable similarity between the Common Law of England, on which so many legal systems in the new nations of the world are based, and those ‘changeless and unwritten laws of God’ to which Sophocles referred. The definition of Common Law, given in Nelson’s Encyclopedia, is in these words, ‘As opposed to Statute Law. it is the unwritten law of the land. Being older than Statute Law, it was founded on considerations of general justice, and fortified by the decisions of judges handed down from generation to generation, and binding on their successors.’

This appears almost casual to people accustomed to everything ‘legal’ being written down, yet it is the system that has worked admirably for many centuries. It was practiced by our brethren on the Continent, until Roman Law was forced upon them against their will, during the sixteenth century.

MORE INFORMATION ON THE CITY OF ZARA IN DALMATIA

As Darda left his name to the geographic area of the Dardanelles, so Zerah’s descendants left his name to a city in Dalmatia and a narrow channel called the “Channel of Zara.” For information on this, I will quote from, The Encyclopædia Britannica,1894, volume 24, page 807:

ZARA (Slav. Zadar), an Austrian seaport, the capital of Dalmatia. and the seat of the Roman Catholic archbishop and of a Greek bishop, lies on the Adriatic, 130 miles southeast of Trieste, opposite the island of Ugliano and Pasman, from which it is separated by the narrow Channel of Zara. The promontory (point of land jutting into the sea) on which it stands is separated from the mainland by a deep moat, practically making an island of the site of the city. Down to 1873, Zara was strongly fortified; but its ramparts have now been converted into elevated promenades, which command extensive views to seaward and to landward. Of its four old gates, one, Porta Marina, incorporates the relics of a Roman arch, and another, the Porta di Terraferma., was designed by Sanmichele. The general aspect of the town, which is oval in form, is thoroughly Venetian. The main streets, dividing it into four quarters, are straight and wide, but the side-streets are ill-paved and narrow. The chief interest in Zara lies in its churches, the most remarkable of which is the cathedral of St. Anastasia, a fine Romanesque basilica, founded by Doge Enrico Dandolo after the capture of the town in 1202 and finished in 1205. The churches of St. Chrysogonus and St. Simeon are also in the Romanesque style, and St. Mary’s retains a fine Romanesque campanile (bell tower) of 1105. The old octagonal church of St. Donatus, traditionally (but in all probability erroneously) said to have been erected in the 9^th century on the site of a temple of Juno, has been converted to secular purposes. Most of the Roman remains were used up in the construction of the fortifications. But two squares are embellished with lofty marble columns; a Roman tower stands on the east side of the town; and some remains of a Roman aqueduct may be seen outside the ramparts. Among the other buildings are the Loggia del Comune, rebuilt in 1565, containing a public library of 34,000 volumes; the old palace of the priors, now the governors residence; and the episcopal palace. The harbor, to the northeast of the town, is safe and spacious, and it is annually entered by about 1200 vessels, of 185,000 tons, mainly engaged in the coasting trade. The chief industry is the preparation of maraschino, made from the marasco cherry, which covers the hills of Dalmatia. About 340,000 bottles of this liqueur are exported annually. Glass-making and fishing are also carried on. The population of the town in 1881 was 11,861, of the commune 24,536. Almost all of these are of Italian descent, and Italian is practically the only language spoken in the town.

The foundation of Zara is ascribed by tradition to Liburni (Illyrian — Elohim people). In the early days of the Roman empire it became a flourishing Roman colony under the name of Jadera, subsequently changed toDiadora, It remained united with the Eastern empire down to about the year 1000, when it sought the Venetian protection. For the next four centuries it was a bone of contention between Venice and Hungary, changing hands repeatedly. It was occupied by the Hungarians at the end of the 12^th century, but was recaptured by the Venetians in 1202, with the aid of French crusaders on their way to the Holy Land. In 1409 it was finally purchased from Hungary by the island republic for 100,000 ducats [$226,800]. In 1792 it passed, with Venice, into the possession of Austria. From 1809 to 1813 it belonged to France.

About 15 miles to the southeast lies Zara Veechia, or Old Zara, an insignificant village on the site of Biograd (White Town), formally the residence of the Croatian kings, but destroyed during the Hungarian-Venetian wars.

Now we will have to find what the term or name “Liburni” means. To do this, we will return to The Encyclopædia Britannica, 1894, volume 14, page 554:

LIBURNIANS were a people who at different times were prominent on the Adriatic coasts. They were originally, one cannot doubt, one of the homogeneous Illyrian tribes (see Illyria). Living in a barren rocky country along the north-eastern coast of the Adriatic they devoted themselves to the sea, and were the chief navigators of the Adriatic in the early period. They settled on the coast of Picenum. where the town of Truentum was always counted Liburnian; and the Greek colonists found them at Corcyra and other places. They were pressed on all sides by other races, but were still a powerful people in the time of Scylax (Scyl., p 7). The islands that lay along the coast were peopled by them and called by their name. They were a race of pirates who used swift boats with a large sail. These Liburnian ships became famous when the Romans adopted them in several of their naval wars. The heavy and lofty ships that had been developed by the later Greek states proved unequal to the light and swift Liburnian boats. The country was incorporated by the Romans in the province of Dalmatia.

This should establish a better concept of just who the man Constantine the Great was, a man of the royal line! With the next lesson, we will leave Constantine the Great and investigate the invasions of Britain by the various Saxon tribes and see how these invasions affected the British Celtic Culdee church. Without the knowledge of this past history, it is impossible to appraise what is called “church” at our present time, Without a working knowledge of the general developments in history since the time of the Passion of our Messiah until now, we will only come to many mistaken conclusions.

HOME