Drama of The Lost Disciples - JESUS OR JUPITER?

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"