George Orwell Claimed Caesar is a Hoax Character

Did Orwell debunk Caesar seventy years before JLB?

 

JLB19044 – George Orwell Claimed Caesar is a Hoax Character (11-Dec-2019)

1984 Review podcast episode 1: http://salzburggold.com/1984-chapter-1-review/
1984 Review podcast episode 2: http://salzburggold.com/1984-chapter-2-review/
1984 Review podcast episode 3: http://salzburggold.com/1984-chapter-3-review/
1984 Review podcast episode 4: http://salzburggold.com/1984-chapter-4-review-comrade-olgilvy-julius-cesar-and-charlamagne/
1984 pdf: https://www.planetebook.com/free-ebooks/1984.pdf

21 thoughts on “George Orwell Claimed Caesar is a Hoax Character

  • 27-December-2019 at 9:31 am
    Permalink

    I read that long ago in 1984, but interpreted it differently at the time. I took Orwell’s point to mean that after a time you wouldn’t be able to differentiate the hoax giving us Ogilvy from “real” historical personages like Caesar or Charlemagne. Of course, Orwell, as you say, could be coyly delivering a subtext.

    I wonder: Aren’t there coins with likenesses of Caesar or Charlemagne that date way back? Ha ha! But maybe not back to the “times” of Caesar or Charlemagne! Robert Spenser of Jihad watch has suggested Mohammad was the invention of the scribes of later Muslim Califfs. Did Caesar appear on coins during his times?

    • 27-December-2019 at 11:16 am
      Permalink

      Robert Spenser should have checked the sources for his ancient texts, because history is indeed a hoax.

      Muhammad was invented in 1861, when I went to look for the primary sources for the Quran and the tales of Muh Ham init, I found a lovely view of a wire frame mesh.

      • 27-December-2019 at 12:44 pm
        Permalink

        I think Thomas Jefferson reported being lectured by an Islamic Ambassador during his war with the Barbary Pirates regarding the Koran and Mohammad. Fake too?

        • 27-December-2019 at 3:50 pm
          Permalink

          Now that’s a fantastic comment, I have never heard of this event. I will have a look into Mr Jefferson’s encounter and report back.

          Born: 13 April 1743, Shadwell, Virginia, United States
          Died: 4 July 1826, Monticello, Virginia, United States

        • 27-December-2019 at 4:47 pm
          Permalink

          I think Thomas Jefferson reported being lectured by an Islamic Ambassador during his war with the Barbary Pirates regarding the Koran and Mohammad. Fake too?

          I hadn’t heard this story before so I decided to spend a little bit of time looking into it. Soon I found myself reading about a guy called Omar ibn Said.

          An article from The Smithsonian entitled ‘Why Thomas Jefferson Owned a Quran’ seems to suggest that Omar ibn Said is an important figure in the history of Islam in the US.

          https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smithsonian-institution/why-thomas-jefferson-owned-qur-1-180967997/

          So I decided to take a look at his wiki page to get an idea of who this guy supposedly is.

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omar_ibn_Said

          Among the references, the oldest listed is from 1831. It is apparently Omar’s autobiography.

          https://docsouth.unc.edu/nc/omarsaid/omarsaid.html

          Unlike most historical texts I have encountered, this one provides a pretty good explanation of the provenance of the documents. It would seem, on first look, that this source attributed to 1831 is really from 1925. From the ‘Source description’ (top of the page):

          Autobiography of Omar ibn Said, Slave in North Carolina, 1831. Ed. John Franklin Jameson. From The American Historical Review, 30, No. 4. (July 1925), 787-795

          This is not necessarily ‘proof’ of anything in and of itself. I would need to try to track down the purported sources for the 1925 articles and see what evidence or narratives they provide for their own provenance. It does however appear to me that Omar ibn Said may be yet another character who is claimed to have existed in the 1800s (or earlier) but for whom the oldest actual evidence, even when taken on face value, is from the 1900s.

          My overall point being, it is worth taking the time to look into these characters for ourselves. Nobody else bothers to do this, which is why the myths and hoaxes are so easily propagated.

          • 27-December-2019 at 10:32 pm
            Permalink

            Jefferson tried to negotiate at some point with the Islamic Barbary Pirates and hosted their Ambassador in the Whitehouse, I think. The Ambassador allegedly informed him that Islam allows taking infidel prisoners and enslaving them which he confirmed in the Koran which he acquired to understand the Barbary Pirates.

            I haven’t had time to review this information. I think the Islamic slave stuff is bogus. Islamic propaganda. I haven’t had time to review this recently, so I’m open to whatever info might be relevant.

  • 27-December-2019 at 9:37 am
    Permalink

    I’ve read that the widely believed Lives of the Twelve Caesars by C. Suetonius Tranquillus was not history, but a political tract along the lines the modern National Inquirer. No I wonder if it might have been created out of the whole cloth much after the Caesar line was gone.

    • 27-December-2019 at 11:16 pm
      Permalink

      I think the “Omar” stuff is what Obama fraudulently based his idea that Islam was important in the founding of America. No, America’s first war was against Islamic slavers as best I can determine tho, who knows, based on my growing skepticism.

  • 28-December-2019 at 4:45 am
    Permalink

    Thomas Jefferson’s alleged writings are voluminous. There should also be records his Administration plus many accounts of the war with the Barbary Pirates. Smithsonian? Just throw that out! Propaganda for sure if even basic facts might be correct.

  • 28-December-2019 at 4:49 am
    Permalink

    My guess has always been that Caesar existed, probably as quite an ordinary man, but was lionized by his own writing: Re: Gaul: “I came, I saw, I conquered.” But, also voluminous writing on the culture of the Gauls as he found them. I thought, but don’t really, know if a lot a original Latin writings from Roman times were available. BUT, who kows since I never checked.

  • 28-December-2019 at 4:59 am
    Permalink

    Kaiser meant Caesar.

    Czar meant Caesar.

    Catholic Church and Holy Roman Empire always aspired to the mantle of Rome. Was the “mantle” of Rome entirely fictitious?

    The spin was ENORMOUS on its face in using words like Caesar and Rome. Aren’t we probably going too far to assume all recollections of earlier times, though obviously infused with myth, are planted?

    • 28-December-2019 at 6:31 am
      Permalink

      What I try to do/think is this – let the evidence do the talking. Which is to say to ignore the narrative in the meantime. Even the counter/alternative narratives (eg Cesar/Kaiser/Khan/Tzar).

      Sweeping all narratives aside, what can one comfortably establish? Well, very few books are from before 1800. This is an issue. Even statues, stones, papyrus etc seem to be of dubious providence. Even the pyramids – were they built by the Egyptians, or were they a creation by Napoleon? Surely not the latter, but how would I confirm this?

      So, for me, I want to establish the evidence first, and then review that to see what narrative suggests itself. But the evidence is so poor. Perhaps my threshold is too high, but I am not comfortable with almost any of the evidence I have found to date.

      It’s pretty uncomfortable! I mainly find that I don’t have much affirmation to give re any of the narratives that are out there. I find I am able to dismiss most alternative explanations. Generally, they are too fantastical given what we can reasonably conclude from what we find.

      It seems though that most of us intuitively need a narrative, regardless of the evidence. I think that emotional need is actually part of the problem. If you want a story, but don’t have evidence (and absence of evidence is not evidence) well, that is not the right way to establish history in my view, even if you do get a good story out of it.

      It is fine to speculate if you account for your assumptions but most are taking huge leaps. Eg the idea of antiquitech. It’s a compelling idea, but there’s real nothing there that I can see that is definitely technology – e.g. where is a tv, radio, phone, camera, heater, etc? The layer of dirt that seems to have covered many cities seems much better evidenced to me, but I still don’t have a viable idea as to a cause or even a time.

  • 28-December-2019 at 10:50 pm
    Permalink

    If memory serves (ha! ha!), Winston Churchill, got his ideas about Islam during his travels as a correspondent and participation in the Boer War (19th Century). His “alleged” writings from those times are available, I assume. He found Islam repugnant based on the Koran and what he saw first hand in Islamic communities. Papal statements about Islam are allegedly available from way back–how to sort truth from fiction? No doubt it would take time to examine the best evidence re: Islam or anything else. Jumping to the conclusion “we can’t know nothing about the past” with any level of confidence might be a good tonic, but it is not irrational to seek a narrative of the big picture. The past existed even if most of what is taught about it is false or, at least, wildly spun and exaggerated.

    • 28-December-2019 at 11:18 pm
      Permalink

      I think the problem we have is in the term Islam being used as a descriptor for a group or race of people. This is the same divide and rule tactic we see used by the state and its media with the Jews as well. So what I am saying is that the people the races should be looked at as a separate entity to the control system that has been enclosed around them.
      If we look at the Talmud for example again the sources for this track back to the 1800’s and stop. With the Quran the sources for this religion also hit the wire frame mesh in the 1800’s.
      So do we see in the stories given like Winston Churchill’s early travel experiences a foundation of propaganda being laid down in preparation for the dissemination and proliferation of the then newly created religious teachings. It clearly does not take many generations for massive societal changes to be put into effect. An introduction even of a religion could be implanted and after a century easily be made to look like it has been in place for what seems like an eternity. As generations die the introduction is forgotten, just like today’s generations forget the time 30 years ago when homosexuality and dressing up as the opposing gender was something that was seen as high comedy now it is a thought crime to think negative about it.

      • 30-December-2019 at 9:41 pm
        Permalink

        There is nothing that won’t hit the friggin’ “wire mesh” the closer you get to the beginning of printing and moveable type which was not that long ago. Anything before that was either not printed in enough copies to be widely available as “primary source” material as we moderns have come to parrot it through our TV baby and indoctrination center downbringings or orally transmitted from one douchebag generation to the next generation of budding douchebags, off center, neurotic and graduating to full-on psychosis by following a psychotic tradition.

        Like that piece of asswipe paper “The Talmud” which was an oral tradition from one generation of baby-dick-sucking moyles and rabbis to another. I love how people talk about a completely grotesque and puke inducing “religion” of psychotics as if it was somehow “normal” and civilized. These are the same lunatics who brought us Freud and psychoanalysis and the Oedipus complex witch doctorisms.

        All religion is a retarded stepchild of real philosophy but the Talmud, that’s not even a religious text (and neither is the Torah which openly advocates usury against non-Jews unlike Catholic tracts) but a criminal tract for usurers, con–artists, child mutilators and molesters, who don’t stop there, they also impose any part of it they can on the non-Jews.

        The last I heard the percentage of WHITE people (of whom I’m sure the 2% Jews of the USA are also included as whites, which they certainly are not in any way as their own genetic hereditary diseases which only Ashkenazis, Sephardics, etcs can get) who had their penises mutilated at or near birth was somewhere between 76% and 90%!

        So how did this come to be? Through the Vatican or “off chessboard weirdos” setting up the poor raggedy-ass dumb Jews? lol Yeah, they own the whole media but that was set-up to set them up too! Anything not to have to name the obvious.

        So not only do they mutilate all their children to traumatize and dramatize them, they also molest them openly as part of their “religion” before they’re even able to speak.

        But all this has no long psychotic inbred genetic history (though there are genetic diseases only Jews can get, separated by Ashkenazi, Sephardic, Mizrahi, etc.) and was “made-up” out of thin air and put in motion like a gigantic motion picture acted by thousands of star performers and millions of extras on the world stage.

        The absurdity and self-importance of 10-fingered and ten-toed human beings with two eyes in their heads and a third one mutilated down below never ceases to amaze me.

        The grandmasters of fakery have come to scare the shit out of us all. More fear porn instead of just naming the obvious. Jews run our countries. They are criminals for the most part. And most of them need to be removed straight out and deported forever to their own shitty country where they can only abuse and mutilate their own. The collective solution is as simple as that to reduce “equality hoax” problems about 70%.

        Note: Everything that follows is completely fake, since all human information was faked 200 years ago, so there is no point in even reading it. It was all set up to bring you into the confusion of conspiritardism and total brainwashing level 5 disguised as a higher “woke” state. Waking up is impossible so don’t even try. Isn’t that the entire gist of the “everything is fake” mentality or the “we subjectively create the world” mentality?

        Even if we could subjectively imagine a consensus of objective reality and bring it into being hard enough as a rock making our head bleed, it certainly wouldn’t be our sick society of brainwashed cowards doing it, but a much healthier re-incarnation of us at a time that never existed a mere 200 putrid chocolate and sugar-crap and junk-food slurping years ago.

        https://imgoat.com/uploads/2c0be24560/202619.jpg

        https://k007.kiwi6.com/hotlink/tqvkma96zu/moo_moo_cow_13.jpg

        https://k007.kiwi6.com/hotlink/qgqy63n9zh/moo_moo_cow_inversion_magick.jpg

  • 28-December-2019 at 11:00 pm
    Permalink

    A very important consideration is that before moveable type printing was in common use, a legion of “scribes” were apparently necessary to reliably transmit history, religion, myths or ideas of any kind. That means history, the Bible, Imperial propaganda, etc. was entirely in the hands of the very rich and powerful. In Rome and other ancient empires that probably meant that the Emperor was the sole source of written information. It would have been easy to eliminate other sources of information as compared to later. Powerful censorship was probably the norm.

    • 28-December-2019 at 11:25 pm
      Permalink

      On the face of it I agree with what you are saying.
      But again the problem arises that from the time we are given of the initiation of the printing press up to the early 1900’s the books and literature do not stand up to scrutiny in most cases. An obvious layer of propaganda.

      • 29-December-2019 at 1:38 am
        Permalink

        Yes, I really don’t know, first hand, how much written record remains, pre- or post- the printing press. No doubt, in search of the “real” narrative, I was too willing to assume others had examined such records. Looking back, I’d say I was most impressed by narratives congruent with my first hand observation of human nature. Yeah, a thin reed.

        Oh! Here’s something that needs to be questioned: the Vatican Library or Archives which often are presented in such a way that they assume the “Mantle” of the much touted “Library of Alexandria”.

  • 28-December-2019 at 11:33 pm
    Permalink

    Big assumption to just focus on the current divide and conquer propaganda around Islam.

    If “normal” history is anywhere near correct, when the Mongols converted to Islam, Islam became the largest, though not perfectly unified, Empire that ever existed stretching from Spain to the Phillipines. ISLAM was the Establishment. “Our” Western Elites were very envious of the total control they saw in Islam and were dependent on trade with Islam.

    The Crusades failed to check Islam ultimately and many Crusaders came back enthralled with Islam, ie. the Knights Templar.

    Sure! All this could be false, exaggerated, etc. Even if false, I do believe, contrary to many conspiracists, it is a myth useful to the current elite in seeking more oppressive tyranny.

  • 29-December-2019 at 12:08 am
    Permalink

    I’m not sure I follow your argument.

    You say: “Jumping to the conclusion “we can’t know nothing about the past” with any level of confidence might be a good tonic, but it is not irrational to seek a narrative of the big picture. The past existed even if most of what is taught about it is false or, at least, wildly spun and exaggerated.”

    Then you say: “The Crusades failed to check Islam ultimately and many Crusaders came back enthralled with Islam, ie. the Knights Templar.”

    Are you saying that you agree that history is somewhat of a hoax, perpetrated by the ‘Emperor’ and the powerful. But that you can navigate what we are told about history to find the underlying reality? And that you see things it terms of an Islamic takeover?

    • 29-December-2019 at 1:42 am
      Permalink

      Yeah, I suspect the current elite wants the tyranny inherent in Islam. It would be so environmentally sound compared to Western society.

      Europe seems to be Islamizing quite rapidly unless demographic reports are a hoax.

      But, you are right. Can anyone, including me, really navigate what we are told about history?

Leave a Reply