All Roads Lead to Rome

reply to post by Aquarius1

it should right up your alley and on topic.

When you say that,it appears to say that what I posted was not "on topic".

A few pages back I did some digging, and came up with a quote from the OP saying Jesus could have been the son of Julius Caesar and Cleopatra,

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler

People often mistake self confidence for arrogance.

And some people do the opposite.

Which is why I feel I now have no choice but to raise everyone's taxes, and start conscription into the legions.

Barack, is that really you?

Thanks for commenting Centurian!

De nada ...

Evidence for God from Science: Christian Apologetics
Old Testament Dates of Solomon and Egyptian King Shishak Confirmed by 14C Dates from Tel Rehov
by Rich Deem
Introduction

The dating of events in Hebrew Old Testament is often assumed to be incorrect by many secular scholars. Much of the scholarship related to the dating of these sites is based upon pottery and other items that are associated with certain civilizations and times. However, the discovery of pottery assemblages with biblical data relating to the monarchies of David and Solomon in the destruction layer of Jezreel, a royal citadel of the Omride Dynasty, which ruled over the northern Kingdom of Israel from 885 to 843 B.C., suggested that the older dates for key sites in Israel (e.g., Hazor, Megiddo, and Gezer) might be much later than the time of King Solomon (second half of the 10th century B.C.). The implication was that archaeological layers traditionally associated with the monarchies of David and Solomon were too young to fit the biblical claims.
New evidence

A team of archeologists from Netherlands and Israel, Drs. Bruins, van der Plicht, and Mazar examined the site of Tel Rehov, in the Beth-Shean/Jordan Valley, 4 miles west of the River Jordan.1 14C radiocarbon dating placed the destruction of Tel Rehov at 940-900 B.C., instead of the later date suggested by the associated pottery.
Biblical and extra-biblical evidence

The place name Rehov occurs on the list of cities conquered by Pharaoh Shoshenq I, known as Shishak in the Bible.2 His Asian campaign was recorded on the southern wall of the temple of Amun at Karnak in Upper Egypt, where Rehov appears after the term "The Valley" (probably referring to the Beth-Shean/Jordan Valley) and before the city name Beth Shean. The Bible says that King Shishak invaded Israel in the fifth year of the reign of Solomon's son, Rehoboam.3 The biblical timeframe would place Solomon's death at 930 B.C., putting Shishak's invasion at 925 B.C., exactly within the range of radiocarbon dates (940-900 B.C.) for the destruction of Tel Rehov.
Conclusion Top of page

High-precision radiocarbon dating of Tel Rehov establishes a date earlier than that suggested by previous studies utilizing pottery finds. The accuracy of 14C dating calls into question previous studies based solely upon pottery evidence. The current dating of Tel Rehov confirms the biblical date for Shishak's invasion of Israel.

www.godandscience.org...

www.sciencemag.org...

14C Dates from Tel Rehov: Iron-Age Chronology, Pharaohs, and Hebrew Kings

Hendrik J. Bruins,1* Johannes van der Plicht,2 Amihai Mazar3

Stratified radiocarbon dates provide an independent chronological link between archaeological layers and historical data. The invasion by Pharaoh Shoshenq I (Shishak) is a key historical synchronism, ~925 B.C.E., mentioned in both Egyptian inscriptions and the Hebrew Bible. The list of places raided by Shoshenq, mentioned at Karnak (Egypt), includes Rehov (Israel). The site yielded a consistent series of radiocarbon dates from the 12th to 9th century B.C.E. Our results (i) suggest a revised Iron-Age chronology; (ii) date an archaeological stratum to Shoshenq's campaign; (iii) indicate the similarity of "Solomonic" and "Omride" pottery; and (iv) provide correlation with Greece and Cyprus.

Originally posted by On the Edge
reply to post by Aquarius1

 

it should right up your alley and on topic.

When you say that,it appears to say that what I posted was not "on topic".

Your posts have been very on topic, and all is well, I wish more people would display your genuine desire to look at the real aspects of this conspiracy.

I am going to give everyone a chance to sort this all out, get their egos in check, take advantage of the opportunity to shine in some threads that are dedicated to what they are most passionate about trying to say, so they can stop making excuses in this one, for not being able to come up with complete theories that tie in to this or offer a comprehensive alternative.

ATS is a challenging environment and a big one too, so I am putting myself out there once more, to lend my own name to these discussions, which if you look at some of the stars for some of the snipes in these new threads, is obviously a factor in any discussion.

I am an honest poster here on ATS always have been, always will be, I didn't set out to become the most starred poster in the history of ATS so shoot me because I am.

I haven't asked any of the hundreds of members who follow my threads to do so, so shoot me because they do.

Or challenge yourself one and all to try to add some great content yourself. No excuses, no whining, no blaming it all on proto if you can't.

Here are the threads once more for.

Ancient Civilizations as they might pertain to this theory.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

UFO's Star Gates, and Aliens

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Religion

www.abovetopsecret.com...

This is a sincere invitation to discuss these things in a topical environment to one's own heart's content, to colloborate and put forth theories, while keeping site on this thread and how they might tie-in.

Your posts have been on topic here and I do appreciate it. Yes how religion is being used is topical, just like how banks are being used is topical, media is being used is topical, military is being used is topical, science and technology being used is topical.

Rome expanded, to include provinces, what passionate posters want to make out of these new threads is entirely up to them, I however remain dedicated to keeping this thread on topic, and my sincere thanks to those who want to do the same, and are.

But it nonetheless sounds like a somewhat strained effort by later Romans to avoid admitting that Rome had in fact been ruled by Etruscans.

Had Rome been ruled by the Etruscans?

The Roman Kings
www.roman-empire.net...

The Etruscan League of 12
www.mysteriousetruscans.com...

www.perseus.tufts.edu...

The earliest settlement at Troy was in the Early Bronze Age at ca. 3000 B.C. This small fortified settlement was destroyed by fire and was followed by Troy II (2500-2200 B.C.), which Schliemann incorrectly believed to have been the city of Priam. Settlement continued throughout the Bronze Age at the site. The latest prehistoric levels are Troy VI (1800-1275 B.C.) and Troy VII (1275-1100 B.C.) and scholars debate which of these levels represent the city of Priam and scene of the Trojan War.

Following the end of the Late Bronze Age there was a 400 year hiatus at the site until it was resettled at ca. 700 B.C. by Greek colonists, possibly from Lesbos or Tenedos. The Early Iron Age city (Troy VIII) was founded with the name Ilion and believed at the time to be the site of Homeric Troy. The city had little political power, but was symbolically important. It was under Persian control from the 6th century B.C. until the liberation of Asia Minor by Alexander the Great in 334 B.C.

In 480 B.C. Xerxes halted at Troy to sacrifice a thousand oxen before crossing the Hellespont into Greece. In 334 B.C. Alexander went to Troy immediately after crossing into Asia Minor to make an offering. Following the death of Alexander in 323 B.C., his successor in Thrace had a new temple of Athena built at the city. Julius Caesar, who believed himself to be a direct descendant of Priam, visited the city and gave it immunity from taxation. In the reign of Augustus the city and the sanctuary of Athena under went a large rebuilding program. Constantine considered Troy as a possible site for his new capital before chosing Byzantium, and as late as A.D. 355 the site was visited by the emperor Julian. By the 4th century A.D., however, the site was little more than a small farming community and by the 12th century A.D. it was completely abandoned.

I thought this was interesting because

Julius Caesar, who believed himself to be a direct descendant of Priam,

en.wikipedia.org...

Family tree

Zeus/Jupiter
MANY on the kings list are myth and legend and cannot be verified.

nope, the moderator crackeur, closed the threads you created proto and insisted we post in this thread.
too bad you still have me on ignore because the post i did manage to put in that thread on ufos, stargates, ets, before it was closed, is pretty relevant to this subject and that one as well.

Folks, one more reminder to stick to the topic and cease all off topic posting and personal attacks.

reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler


As two humble students of Rome, you and I are familiar with Constantine the Great's adoption to Christianity. Especially the creation of the Bible and the Roman Catholic Church. But, we have to remember (even though history chooses to ignore) many of the original Christians protested at the "new" Roman religion.

Why?

These Christians argued that Rome was not practicing true Christianity. In fact, Jesus Christ was against organised religion and was teaching the fundamental principles of the Law of One. The ancient religion of Atlantis and the true spiritual movement of the universe. After all, the Law of One teaches freedom, responsibility and unity of all life. The elites would rather be in control - not the people. Certain knowledge, from an Astral level, in the eyes of the elite, can NEVER reach you and I. Majority of those at the center of this cabal, think they understand. But they don't. The Law of One is philosophy that cannot be manipulated by the powerful. Babylon and Egypt both were aware and students of it's influence, but struggled to understand it's full potential.

The Roman Catholic Church, and Rome itself, is fighting a losing battle. All the major Abrahamic religions are. It is a campaign to repress any spiritual individualism and maintain the current status quo (religion worshiped on a systematic and institutionalised way) After all, on his visit to the United Kingdom, Pope Benedict XVI was informing us that the Church is supreme and holds the key to heaven. According to them, there is no "other way."

A question: Is Rome trying to fulfill a prophecy or is trying to prevent one?

pg.11

reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler

You might want to ask yourself, were the Romans perhaps purposefully providing a magnificent new cultural center for Islam, replete with established trade routes already to it, so that there could be an easy exchange on some trade and diplmoatic levels, but still at the same time, create those schisms of which the Church has suffered many of, as it divides itself into different portions, while making sure that the most important concepts and goals are embraced?

Was Constantinople put out there as a prize, as bait, to encourage the Muslim world to grow a bit larger and reach a bit further?

And was that point they would reach in fact where Rome wanted them to be all along as part of the plan?

So as I asked 10,000 pages back, here I find an answer, so there is a role for Islam, I am on page 19 now

reply to post by undo


Correct me if I am wrong, but according to the book Stargate Conspiracies the CIA and the Vatican were heavily interested in the allege discoveries of the Giza Plateau? If I recall, in the earlier pages of the stargate thread - we worked together on it (back in 2005/06)

NWO - Seat of Satan - Revived Roman Empire - Part 1 of 6 www.youtube.com...
pt2 www.youtube.com...
pt3 www.youtube.com...
pt4 www.youtube.com...
pt5 www.youtube.com...
pt6 www.youtube.com...

These videos show pre Roman links to present EU ..They are searched out from the link to the book of Revelation pertaining to end time prophecy . S&F for this new post .I will be following along as you do gather quite a crowd with some really good info ...peace

reply to post by the2ofusr1


European federalists, during the 50 year celebration of the European Union referred to the project as the new Roman Empire. I kid you not. The President of the Commission compared Europe to "the world's first non-imperial empire"

Further you have to understand that while your theory on time, actually supports the concept of Caesar as Christ, because it would have been much harder to pattern Caesar off of Christ had Christ in fact existed and come first, you should though keep in mind, as should I that our only real accounts of all this, are Rome’s accounts. How Rome portrays the Time Line may not be entirely accurate.

Next to better understand, Caesar would initially live on in the next 8 dictators that would follow who were descendents of him.

Much of what the Oligarchs do, is hand things down from Father to son, Father to son, ask the Rockefellers, Bush Family and Rothschild Family if you don’t believe me.

The plans of the Father often are tasked to the son, to the grandson, to the great grandson and so on and so forth to carry out.



[edit on 26/4/10 by ProtoplasmicTraveler]

Descendants

Augustus's only child was his daughter. His sixth great-grandson Gaius Avidus Cassius (ca. 130–175 AD) had four children. The youngest daughter bore a daughter who married and had a daughter. Whether there were any descendants of Augustus after the early decades of the 3rd century, is unknown.

1. Julia the Elder, 39BC – AD14, had 5 children;

A. Gaius Caesar, 20BC – AD4, died without issue
B. Julia the Younger, 19BC – AD28, had 2 children;

I. Aemilia Lepida (fiancee of Claudius), 4BC – AD53, had 5 children;

a. Marcus Junius Silanus Torquatus, 14 – 54, had 1 child;

i. Lucius Junius Silanus Torquatus the younger, 50 – 66, died young

b. Junia Calvina, 15 – 79, died without issue
c. Decimus Junius Silanus Torquatus, d. 64 without issue
d. Lucius Junius Silanus Torquatus the elder, d. 49 without issue
e. Junia Lepida, ca 18 – 65, had 2 children;

i. Cassia Longina, ca 35 – ?; had 2 children;

i. Domitia Corbula, had 1 child;

i. unknown son

ii. Domitia Longina, c. 53 – 130, wife of Domitian

ii. Cassius Lepidus, ca 55 – ?, 1 child;

i. Cassia Lepida, ca 80 – ?; had 1 child;

i. Julia Cassia Alexandria, had 1 child;

i. Gaius Avidius Cassius, ca 130 – 175; had 3 children;

i. Avidius Heliodorus
ii. Avidius Maecianus
iii. Avidia Alexandria

II. Marcus Aemilius Lepidus (executed 39), 6 – 39, died without issue

C. Lucius Caesar, 17BC – AD2, died without issue
D. Agrippina the Elder, 14BC – AD33, had 6 children;

I. Nero Caesar, 6 – 30, died without issue
II. Drusus Caesar, 7 – 33, died without issue
III. Caligula, 12 – 41, had 1 child;

a. Julia Drusilla, 39 – 41, died young

IV. Agrippina the Younger, 15 – 59, had 1 child;

a. Nero, 37 – 68, had 1 child;

i. Claudia Augusta, Jan. 63 – April 63; died young

V. Drusilla (sister of Caligula), 16 – 38, died without issue
VI. Julia Livilla, 18 – 42, died without issue

E. Agrippa Postumus, 12BC – AD14, died without issue

en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by infinite
There is alot of info that is right in front of us in those clips I posted ,so yea you are not kidding and are right on target . peace

I think the Romans are really a super-secret group of Extraterrestrials who have ruled us for thousands of years, since the time of Ancient Civilizations.

They have Stargate technology and all kinds of other advanced technology and that's why we can never really beat them and liberate ourselves.

Oh yeah, and they control all the world Religions too.

Just thought I'd put that out there. Why not?

All dates and names are given as they appear in Magistrates of the Roman Republic by T.R.S. Broughton.

* 501 BC: Titus Lartius Flavus. Rei gerundae causa.
* 501 BC: Manius Valerius. Rei gerundae causa.
* 498 BC: Aulus Postumius Albus Regillensis. Rei gerundae causa.
* 494 BC: Manius Valerius Maximus. Rei gerundae causa.
* 463 BC: Gaius Aemilius Mamercus? Clavi figendi causa? (possibly interrex, not dictator).
* 458 BC: Lucius Quinctius Cincinnatus (first term). Rei gerundae causa.
* 439 BC: Cincinnatus (second term). Rei gerundae causa or seditionis sedandae causa.
* 437 BC: Mamercus Aemilius Mamercinus (first term). Rei gerundae causa.
* 435 BC: Quintus Servilius Priscus Fidenas (first term). Rei gerundae causa.
* 434 BC: Mamercus Aemilius Mamercinus (second term). Rei gerundae causa.
* 431 BC: Aulus Postumius Tubertus. Rei gerundae causa.
* 426 BC: Mamercus Aemilius Mamercinus (third term). Rei gerundae causa.
* 418 BC: Quintus Servilius Priscus Fidenas (second term). Rei gerundae causa.
* 408 BC: Publius Cornelius Rutilus Cossus. Rei gerundae causa.
* 396 BC: Marcus Furius Camillus (first term). Rei gerundae causa.
* 390 BC: Marcus Furius Camillus (second term). Rei gerundae causa.
* 389 BC: Marcus Furius Camillus (third term). Rei gerundae causa.
* 385 BC: Aulus Cornelius Cossus. Rei gerundae causa.
* 380 BC: Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus Capitolinus. Rei gerundae et seditionis sedandae causa.
* 368 BC: Marcus Furius Camillus (fourth term). Rei gerundae causa.
* 368 BC: Publius Manlius Capitolinus. Seditionis sedandae et rei gerundae causa.
* 367 BC: Marcus Furius Camillus (fifth term). Rei gerundae causa.
* 363 BC: Lucius Manlius Capitolinus Imperiosus. Clavi figendi causa.
* 362 BC: Appius Claudius Crassus Inregillensis. Rei gerundae causa.
* 361 BC: Titus Quinctius Poenus Capitolinus Crispinus. Rei gerundae causa.
* 360 BC: Quintus Servilius Ahala. Rei gerundae causa.
* 358 BC: Gaius Sulpicius Peticus. Rei gerundae causa.
* 356 BC: Gaius Marcius Rutilus. Rei gerundae causa.
* 353 BC: Titus Manlius Imperiosus Torquatus (first term). Rei gerundae causa.
* 352 BC: Gaius Julius Iullus. Rei gerundae et comitiorum habendorum causa.
* 351 BC: Marcus Fabius Ambustus. Comitiorum habendorum causa.
* 350 BC: Lucius Furius Camillus (first term). Comitiorum habendorum causa.
* 349 BC: Titus Manlius Imperiosus Torquatus (second term). Comitiorum habendorum causa.
* 345 BC: Lucius Furius Camillus (second term). Rei gerundae causa.
* 344 BC: Publius Valerius Publicola. Feriarum constituendarum causa.
* 342 BC: Marcus Valerius Corvus (first term). Seditionis sedandae causa or rei gerundae causa.
* 340 BC: Lucius Papirius Crassus. Rei gerundae causa.
* 339 BC: Quintus Publilius Philo. Non military; carried out certain legal reforms.
* 335 BC: Lucius Aemilius Mamercinus Privernas. Comitiorum habendorum causa.
* 333 BC: Publius Cornelius Rufinus. Rei gerundae causa?
* 332 BC: Marcus Papirius Crassus. Rei gerundae causa.
* 331 BC: Gnaeus Quinctius Capitolinus. Clavi figendi causa.
* 325 BC: Lucius Papirius Cursor (first term). Rei gerundae causa.
* 324 BC: Lucius Papirius Cursor (second term). Rei gerundae causa.
* 322 BC: Aulus Cornelius Cossus Arvina. Rei gerundae et ludorum faciendorum causa.
* 320 BC: Gaius Maenius (first term). Quaestionibus exercendis.
* 320 BC: Lucius Cornelius Lentulus. Rei gerundae causa?
* 320 BC: Titus Manlius Imperiosus Torquatus (third term). Comitiorum habendorum causa?
* 316 BC: Lucius Aemilius Mamercinus Privernas. Rei gerundae causa.
* 315 BC: Quintus Fabius Maximus Rullianus (first term). Rei gerundae causa.
* 314 BC: Gaius Maenius (second term). Rei gerundae causa.
* 313 BC: Gaius Poetelius Libo Visolus. Rei gerundae et clavi figendi causa.
* 313 BC: Quintus Fabius Maximus Rullianus (second term). Rei gerundae causa.
* 312 BC: Gaius Sulpicius Longus. Rei gerundae causa?
* 312 BC: Gaius Junius Bubulcus Brutus. Rei gerundae causa (possibly magister equitum, not dictator).
* 310 BC: Lucius Papirius Cursor (third term). Rei gerundae causa.
* 309 BC: Lucius Papirius Cursor (fourth term). Rei gerundae causa.
* 306 BC: Publius Cornelius Scipio Barbatus. Comitiorum habendorum causa.
* 302 BC: Gaius Junius Bubulcus Brutus (second term?). Rei gerundae causa.
* 302 BC: Marcus Valerius Corvus (second term). Rei gerundae causa.
* 301 BC: Marcus Valerius Corvus (third term). Rei gerundae causa.
* Between 291 and 285: Marcus Aemilius Barbula. Rei gerundae causa?
* Between 291 and 285: Appius Claudius Caecus. Rei gerundae causa?
* Between 291 and 285: Publius Cornelius Rufinus. Rei gerundae causa?
* 287 BC: Quintus Hortensius. Seditionis sedandae causa or rei gerundae causa.
* 280 BC: Gnaeus Domitius Ahenobarbus. Comitiorum habendorum causa.
* 263 BC: Gnaeus Fulvius Maximus Centumalus. Clavi figendi causa.
* 257 BC: Quintus Ogulnius Gallus. Ludorum faciendorum causa.
* 249 BC: Marcus Claudius Glicia. Rei gerundae causa?
* 249 BC: Aulus Atilius Caiatinus. Rei gerundae causa.
* 246 BC: Tiberius Coruncanius. Comitiorum habendorum causa.
* 231 BC: Gaius Duilius. Comitiorum habendorum causa.
* 224 BC: Lucius Caecilius Metellus. Comitiorum habendorum causa.
* 221 BC: Quintus Fabius Maximus Verrucosus Cunctator (first term). Rei gerundae causa?
* 217 BC: Quintus Fabius Maximus Verrucosus Cunctator (second term). Rei gerundae causa.
* 217 BC: Marcus Minucius Rufus. Rei gerundae causa.
* 216 BC: Marcus Junius Pera. Rei gerundae causa.
* 216 BC: Marcus Fabius Buteo. Legendo senatui.
* 213 BC: Gaius Claudius Centho. Comitiorum habendorum causa.
* 210 BC: Quintus Fulvius Flaccus. Comitiorum habendorum causa.
* 208 BC: Titus Manlius Torquatus. Comitiorum habendorum et ludorum faciendorum causa.
* 207 BC: Marcus Livius Salinator. Comitiorum habendorum causa.
* 205 BC: Quintus Caecilius Metellus. Comitiorum habendorum causa.
* 203 BC: Publius Sulpicius Galba Maximus. Comitiorum habendorum causa or rei gerundae causa.
* 202 BC: Gaius Servilius Geminus. Comitiorum habendorum causa
* 82/81 to 81: Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix Legibus faciendis et rei publicae constituendae causa.
* 49 to 45 BC: Gaius Julius Caesar (first to fifth terms). Rei gerundae causa.
* 44 BC: Gaius Julius Caesar. Rei gerundae causa (fifth term), then perpetuus.

en.wikipedia.org...

so after the dictators should we do popes?

List of popes
en.wikipedia.org...

Dictators
* 49 to 45 BC: Gaius Julius Caesar (first to fifth terms). Rei gerundae causa.
* 44 BC: Gaius Julius Caesar. Rei gerundae causa (fifth term), then perpetuus.

Popes,

first century, just listed a few for time line

30 – 64/67 Pope-peter St. Peter
PETRUS

64/67(?) – 76/79(?) St. Linus
LINUS

76/79(?) – 88 St. Anacletus
(Cletus)
ANACLETUS

Etruscan monarchy in Rome
www.blacksacademy.net...

abacus.bates.edu...
abacus.bates.edu...

# Rome ruled by a monarchy before 510 BCE
# The original monarchs were of Latin or Sabine ethnic origin
# The last monarchs were Etruscan who greatly influenced Rome's political and religious traditions.
# The monarchs were driven out by an aristocractic rebellion.
# After a somewhat rocky start, the Romans adopted a republican form of government.
# The most enjoyable account of Roman legends about their kings if found in Livy, Book 1.

Sabine
en.wikipedia.org...
ancienthistory.about.com...

Latium
en.wikipedia.org...

The selection of Jupiter as a state god and the descent of the name Latini to the name of the Latin language are sufficient to identify the Latins as a tribe of Indo-European descent. Vergil, a major poet of the early Roman Empire, under Augustus, derived Latium from the word for "hidden" (English latent) because in a myth Saturn, ruler of the golden age in Latium, hid (latuisset)[2] from Jupiter there.[3]

Indo-European descent.

Livy's History of Rome: Book 1
mcadams.posc.mu.edu...

The traditions of what happened prior to the foundation of the City or whilst it was being built, are more fitted to adorn the creations of the poet than the authentic records of the historian, and I have no intention of establishing either their truth or their falsehood. This much licence is conceded to the ancients, that by intermingling human actions with divine they may confer a more august dignity on the origins of states. Now, if any nation ought to be allowed to claim a sacred origin and point back to a divine paternity that nation is Rome

mcadams.posc.mu.edu...

ancienthistory.about.com...
well, that was tedious.

If we have to take this into the modern era, which we do.
Kings of Italy
The first man who called himself king of Italy was the German Odoacer who is most famous for the deposing of the last West Roman emperor 476.The kingdom he created was conquered by the Ostrogoths 493 whom in their turn lost it to East Rome which lost it to the Lombards and so on...

www.tacitus.nu...

476-493 Odoacre * Odoacer
493-526
526-534
534-536
536-540
(536)-541
541
541-552
552-553
534-553
Ostrogothic Kingdom


Teoderico *
Atalarico
Teodato
Vitige
Ildibaldo
Erarico
Baduila (Totila)
Teia
Conquered by East Rome
Theodoric the Great
Athalarik
Theodohad
Vitiges
Hildebad
Erarik
Baduila (Totila)
Teia

568-572
572-574
574-584
584-590
591-616
616-626
626-636
636-652
652-653
653-661
661-662
661-662
662-671
671-688
680-700
689
701
701
701-712
712
712-744
744
744-749
749-756
756-774
Lombard Kingdom

Alboino
Clefi
Divided into several duchies
Autari
Agilulfo
Adaloaldo
Arioaldo
Rotari
Rodoaldo
Ariperto
Pertarito
Godeperto
Grimoaldo
Pertarito (restored)
Cuniperto
Alachi
Liutberto
Raginperto
Ariperto
Ansprando
Liutprando
Ildebrando
Alboin
Cleph

Authari
Agilulf
Adaloald
Arioald
Rothari
Rodoald
Aripert
Perctarit
Godepert
Grimoald
Perctarit
Cunincpert
Alahis
Liutpert
Raginpert
Aripert
Ansprand
Liutprand
Hildeprand
Rachis
Astolfo
Desiderio * Ratchis
Aistulf
Desiderius


774-814
781-810
812-817
813-840
817-855
844-875
875-877
877-879
879-888
Frankish Part Kingdom

Carlomagno (Charlemagne)
Pipino
Bernardo
Ludovico il Pio (the Pious)
Lotario I
Ludovico II
Carlo il Calvo (the Bald)
Carlomanno
Carlo il Grosso (the Fat) = 800


= 813
= 823
= 850
= 875

= 881
888-924
889-894
891-898
894-896
900-905
922-926
926-947
931-950
950-961
952-961
961-973
973-983
983-1002
1002-1014
National Kings

Berengario I
Guido
Lamberto
Arnolfo
Ludovico III (the Blind)
Rodolfo
Ugo
Lotario II
Berengario II
Adalberto
Ottone I (Otto the Great)
Ottone II
Ottone III
Arduino
= 915
= 891
= 892
= 896
= 901





= 962
= 967
= 996



From 1014 was Italy united with Germany in a personal union.
The kingdom of Italy was not formally dissolved until 1648, but
it had been divided into numerous feudal petty states and self-
governing communes since the 13th century.

1805-1814
1814-1861



House of Bonaparte

Napoleone
Divided into petty states



1861-1878
1878-1900
1900-1946
1946
1946-

House of Savoy

Vittorio Emanuele II
Umberto I
Vittorio Emanuele III
Umberto II
Republic

Adaptive Model of the Global World System

"The Club [of Rome] had its beginnings in April of 1968, when leaders from ten different countries gathered in Rome...The organization claims to have the solutions for world peace and prosperity...The Club of Rome has been charged with the task of overseeing the regionalizaton and unification of the entire world...

"The Club's findings and recommendations are published from time to time in special, highly confidential reports, which are sent to the power-elite to be implemented. On 17 September 1973 the Club released one such report, entitled Regionalized and Adaptive Model of the Global World System... The document reveals that the Club has divided the world into ten political/ economic regions, which it refers to as 'kingdoms.'"

The Ten Kingdoms of the New World Government

Kingdom 1: Canada and the United States of America
Kingdom 2: European Union - Western Europe
Kingdom 3: Japan
Kingdom 4: Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, Israel and Pacific Islands
Kingdom 5: Eastern Europe
Kingdom 6: Latin America - Mexico, Central and South America
Kingdom 7: North Africa and the Middle East (Moslems)
Kingdom 8: Central Africa
Kingdom 9: South and Southeast Asia
Kingdom 10: Central Asia

www.remnantofgod.org...

There is a map on this page,with an update saying that Mexico has officially been added to the "kingdom" joining America and Canada,according to TPTB.

I've felt that we've been operating as though we were already a part of the North American Union,with the leniency toward illegals in the country.

"North American Union to Replace USA?"
www.humanevents.com...

". The president NEVER got that Constitutionally required consent for NAFTA, or CAFTA or the SPP which is an agreement to merge our country with Mexico and Canada in order to create the NorthAmerican Union

www.claytonmspaparazzi.com... oreign-relations-cfr-federal-reserve-bilderbrg-group-part-1.html

But the Presidents do answer to the Club of Rome!

reply to post by On the Edge


Some of those kingdoms do not make geological sense.

The African Union is already discussing the United States of Africa - it was covered by the BBC. Only South Africa is blocking the formation, but is currently being persuaded to accept federalism.