by Mish Shedlock‚ Mish Talk: In a fake attempt to portray global unanimity on climate change‚ the United Arab Emirates negotiated a “phaseout” of fossil fuels. John Kerry is singing hallelujah over nothing. The Phony Climate Promises of COP28 The Wall Street Journal comments on The Phony Climate Promises of COP28 The COP28 climate confab in […]

from Mark Dice:  TRUTH LIVES on at https://sgtreport.tv/

by Alan Barton‚ All News Pipeline: – The US Govt Has Joined China And Their ‘Reign Of Terror’ Upon ‘The People’ Back in 1976 a couple of US senators‚ Republican Mark Hatfield of Oregon and Democrat Vance Hartke of Indiana‚ proposed in a Bill to create an organization called the George Washington Peace Academy to […]

by Jake Welch‚ The National Pulse: The United States terrorist watchlist has expanded to over two million people‚ almost doubling over the past six years and including an ever-increasing number of U.S. citizens‚ according to a recent investigation. The government watchlist‚ which contains the names of either known or suspected terrorists‚ had just 120‚000 included when it first […]

The ultimate mash-up. READ MORE...

  On the 22nd of May in the year 337 CE‚ the Roman Emperor‚ Constantine the Great‚ passed away near the city of Nicomedia in northwestern Asia Minor. He had ruled as Emperor for thirty-one years‚ including thirteen as sole Augustus of the Roman state after periodically dismantling the tetrarchic order constructed under Diocletian. His passing saw the Roman Empire again split between multiple Augusti and his heirs quickly descend into internecine struggle. This article will explore the successors of Constantine the Great from his initial plans for succession‚ through to the death of his last surviving son.   Constantine the Great’s Successors: The Mystery of Crispus and Fausta The porphyry sarcophagus of St Helena‚ the mother of Constantine‚ likely similar to where Constantine would have been entombed in the Church of the Holy Apostles in Constantinople‚ via Wikimedia Commons.   Like his father before him‚ Constantine had set aside his first wife for a second‚ more politically astute choice. A year after his acclamation as Augustus by the legions in Britain‚ Constantine discarded his first wife‚ Minervina‚ for Fausta‚ daughter of the retired Augustus‚ Maximian. This helped solidify Constantine as a legitimate fellow in the tetrarch’s imperial college. However‚ also like his father‚ Constantine continued to see his son from his first marriage‚ Crispus‚ as his primary successor.   In 317 CE likely in his late teens‚ Crispus was elevated to the rank of Caesar in the west‚ anticipating his future succession to a higher rank. Alongside Crispus the son of the eastern Augustus‚ Licinius‚ and Constantine’s eldest son by Fausta‚ Constantine II‚ were also afforded the rank of Caesar.   Here we see Constantine beginning to stack the imperial deck of cards in favor of his blood relations. He would eventually remove Licinius in 324 CE and add the eastern provinces to his dominion. However‚ before that‚ Crispus took command in Gaul‚ basing himself at Trier and campaigning against the Franks and other Germanic tribes along the Rhine. In essence‚ beginning to secure a power base for himself among the Gallic legions.   Solidus of Crispus‚ 317-24‚ via the British Museum   Crispus must have felt fairly optimistic about his future career until 326 CE when he was suddenly executed on the orders of his father near modern Pula in Croatia. He was traveling to Rome with the royal entourage to celebrate the twentieth year of Constantine’s reign at the time. Shortly after Fausta also died‚ and though the manner of her demise could have been natural‚ it has also been rumored that Constantine had her suffocated in a steam room.   The motivations for or reasons behind Crispus and Fausta’s deaths remain a mystery‚ with several theories put forward. They range from the simple idea that Crispus was caught plotting to overthrow his father‚ to the accusation of a sordid affair between Crispus and Fausta‚ and also the belief that Fausta had framed Crispus to secure the future of her own sons in a post-Constantine power struggle. This would also potentially explain Fausta’s subsequent death after Constantine discovered her duplicity.   Constantius II and the Massacre of the Princes Solidus of Constantius II‚ via Baldwins   When Constantine died near Nicomedia‚ his middle son Constantius was on hand in the east to organize the funeral and receive the political acclaim associated with entombing his father in the center of the Church of the Holy Apostles in Constantinople (Eusebius‚ book 4.70). This was because‚ like his brothers and cousins‚ he had been elevated to the rank of Caesar sometime before his father’s death‚ and Constantius had been allocated authority over the East. Constantine’s nephew‚ Dalmatius‚ had been made Caesar in Macedonia and Thrace. His other nephew‚ Hannibalianus had been made a king of kings‚ ruling Pontus and Armenia and likely more if his uncle’s Persian campaign had succeeded. Constantine’s other two sons by Fausta — Constantine II and Constans — had been made Caesars in the west and Italy/Illyricum respectively.   Constantius was about to make the division of the empire slightly easier to understand. Shortly after his father’s funeral‚ Constantius locked down the palace in Constantinople and had the troops massacre his cousins and uncles including the aforementioned Dalmatius and Hannibalianus. This assured the division of the empire between Constantius and his two brothers. There did‚ however‚ remain two boys in the family‚ too young to pose any threat to Constantius at the time‚ Gallus and Julian.   The Neo-Triumvirate  Map of the Roman Empire divided between the sons of Constantine‚ via Ian Mladjov resources   After Constantius had dispatched with most of his prominent male relatives in the slaughter at Constantinople‚ he traveled north to Sirmium. There he met his elder brother‚ Constantine II‚ and his younger brother Constans. Together they divided the Roman Empire between the three of them‚ however‚ Constantine II‚ the eldest brother‚ did not partake in the spoils of the massacre of the princes. Due to the locality of Dalmatius’s domains‚ Constantius and Constans divided his territories between themselves‚ with Constantius alone assuming Hannibalianus’s kingdoms. To massage the bruised ego of Constantine II he was given a sort of stewardship over his brother so that he felt he had authority over a portion of the empire befitting the eldest son of Constantine the Great.   Statue of Constantine II‚ on the Cordonata in Rome‚ via Wikimedia Commons   The fact that the succession of the three sons was so disorganized‚ violent‚ and haphazard is because their father did not specifically plan who would succeed him and how. Constantine the Great had obviously intended his empire to pass to his sons and nephews as he had elevated them to prominent positions‚ but he never designated an official heir.   Generally‚ primogeniture‚ the inheritance by the eldest son‚ was practiced in the Roman world. However‚ Constantine’s bequeathal was more akin to the partible inheritance observed by Frankish kings in which the possessions of the father were divided between all the male heirs. Again‚ it is unknown why Constantine did not make any succession plans but several suggestions have been put forward. He may have feared an ambitious potential heir prematurely seizing power‚ like Crispus may have planned. He may have thought he had more time before he died‚ though at 65 he was no spring chicken. He may have intended for his sons to fight it out until the alpha of the pack achieved supremacy‚ as he had done over the other tetrarchs. Or‚ simply‚ he may have been too egotistical to care about anything after his own death.   A House Divided Constantinian family tree‚ by John B Firth‚ via Project Gutenberg   The harmony between the three brothers did not‚ surprisingly‚ last long. Constantine II‚ obviously unsatisfied with his lot‚ began to covet the dominions of his youngest brother. First‚ he insisted that Constans hand over the African provinces‚ which Constans agreed to in the hope of avoiding conflict. However‚ he retained control of Carthage and its surroundings as he refused to break the valuable Carthage-Italy tax and grain spine.   In 340 CE Constantine marched into Italy in a ruse claiming to be marching to support his young brother’s campaigns in Dacia. However‚ he began to lay siege to Aquileia where he was killed by an elite detachment of Constans’s troops. From then on‚ the youngest brother took over the entire west and controlled the largest part of the empire.   Bust of Constans‚ via Louvre   The young Constans did not rule well. Sources describe his rule as an “intolerable tyranny” which led to much resentment from the noble and officer classes. He also rewarded a select body of Germanic troops with whom he hunted‚ to the neglect of the rest of the army. Gradually a conspiracy formed and in 350 CE the Rhine legions proclaimed the general Magnentius as emperor at a banquet in Autun. The rest of the western legions soon joined Magnentius’ cause and Constans‚ absent of support‚ chose flight. He was unable to escape Gaul before he was caught and executed.   Mursa Major The Emperor Constantius II enters Rome after his victory over Magnentius‚ via Vcoins   Magnentius had secured the support of the entire Gallic Prefecture‚ Britain‚ Gaul‚ and Hispania‚ and soon moved on to Italy. In Rome‚ one of the descendants of Constantine and a survivor of the massacre of the princes‚ Nepotianus‚ declared himself emperor. He lasted less than a month in the ancient capital before Magnentius’ forces paraded his head around the city. Meanwhile‚ in the Illyrian provinces‚ Constantina‚ daughter of Constantine the Great and sister to the remaining emperor‚ urged the old general Vetranio to proclaim himself emperor as well. Constantina must have feared that Magnentius was out to kill every member of the Constantinian family he could get his hands on and hoped that Vetranio could buy her some time while her brother was occupied in the east.   Constantius was already engaged in another round of the seemingly endless struggle with Sassanid Persia. After Constantine the Great’s sabre rattling‚ his death encouraged the Persian King of Kings to invade the Syrian provinces. Constantius had been dealing with this war intermittently ever since. However‚ this internal dissension could not go ignored so he began to wrap up operations in the east and march west with his legions. Vetranio and Magnentius initially presented a united front against Constantius‚ petitioning him to legitimize them as his junior colleagues. Constantius point blank refused to recognize Magnentius but accepted Vetranio as co-emperor for the time being. Once he reached Serdica in Illyria he deposed Vetranio‚ mercifully allowing him to live out his retirement‚ and united their forces to move against Magnentius.   Coin fo the usurper Magnentius‚ 351‚ via Wikimedia Commons   The combined forces of east and west finally met in September 351 CE near the town of Mursa‚ in an eastern corner of modern Croatia. Though Constantius himself was busy praying‚ his generals and legions met Magnentius’ forces in a great battle that lasted well into the night. When dawn broke upwards of 50‚000 men lay dead. Devastatingly for the prospects of the empire‚ these 50‚000 dead were all Roman forces. This annihilation left the empire bereft of maybe between an eighth and a twelfth of its overall military strength. Constantius could claim victory‚ but nothing was decisive. He was not able to finally defeat Magnentius for another two years until the Battle of Mons Seleucus‚ 353 CE‚ after which the usurper ended his own life.   The Self-fulfilling Paranoia of Constantius Ruins of an amphitheatre in Antioch‚ the city from which Gallus ruled as Caesar in the east‚ via Antioch Trading   The death of Magnentius did not do much to ease the concerns of Constantius for the security of his throne. True‚ he was now the ruler of the whole empire‚ but the scope of his awesome power made him constantly worried about ceding or losing it. As he had left for the west for the campaign against Magnentius‚ he had appointed one of his surviving cousins‚ Gallus‚ as Caesar to rule over the east in his absence. Gallus proved either to be a decadent‚ ineffectual‚ and potentially treasonous Caesar‚ or he made enemies in Antioch that sought to portray him as such. Regardless‚ Gallus was eventually lured towards Milan in 354 CE with the promise of promotion to full Augustus. However‚ en route he was captured‚ interrogated‚ and executed by some of Constantius’ senior officers.   The fiasco with Gallus and the acquisition of the western portion of the empire must have made Constantius further realize how vast his domains truly were. A central administration would struggle to govern such a territory in the modern era‚ let alone with ancient bureaucracies and systems of communication. As a result‚ Constantius needed to delegate much of his power and implicitly trust his chosen representatives. He had massacred most of his male relatives and the one he had trusted‚ Gallus‚ had proved disastrous. He therefore chose a reliable Frankish general‚ Silvanus‚ to run the military establishment of most of the western empire. Using barbarian generals had become an unofficial imperial policy attempting to prevent powerful Romans from trying to claim the throne. However‚ Silvanus would prove that policy was ineffective.   Cameo of Emperor Julian sacrificing‚ 4th century‚ via Wikimedia Commons   Silvanus had been an important figure in the western military establishment for some time and had served under Magnentius. He had defected from the usurper to Constantius prior to the battle at Mursa‚ potentially impacting the result. He was rewarded with the position of Magister Militum (352 CE) for the Gallic provinces‚ a very powerful position due to the size of the army under his command.   However‚ Silvanus had enemies at the court of Constantius who doctored a letter to present evidence he was conspiring to seize the throne. Though the conspiracy was uncovered‚ the knowledge of Constantius’ paranoia pushed Silvanus into actual rebellion against the emperor in 355 CE. The revolt was short-lived and was put down in the same year‚ but it again convinced Constantius that he needed a strong familial connection in power in the west.   Here enters Julian. A fascination of contemporary and modern observers alike for his potential to impact on western history. He is usually given either the appellation “the philosopher” or “the apostate.” A nephew of the Great Constantine and the last remaining male relative of Constantius after the death of his cousin Gallus. Julian would have loved to have remained a scholar-cum-philosopher in the East but was removed from his studies to serve as Caesar in Gaul for his cousin. Here he won a victory against the Alamanni at the Battle of Strasbourg‚ in 357 CE and his successful generalship endeared him to his Gallic troops‚ who he promised he would never deploy in a foreign adventure.   The Successors of Constantine: The Last Survivor A coin featuring Emperor Julian and his signature beard‚ 355-63 CE‚ via the British Museum‚ London   Julian’s success in Gaul worried Constantius. He would be unable to deal with another western usurper as he was making preparations for an offensive against the Sassanids. In an attempt to kill two birds with one stone‚ in early 360 CE Constantius ordered Julian to send him half his legions to support the Persian campaign. Perhaps with some encouragement from Caesar‚ the western legions proclaimed Julian as Augustus in response. In 361 CE Julian began his march east while Constantius began his march west in anticipation of yet another confrontation between the forces of the two halves of the empire. However‚ en route‚ Constantius fell ill and died on the evening of the 3rd of November.   In his final hours‚ he named Julian as his sole successor and heir to the whole empire‚ preventing the continuation of civil war and keeping the imperial title within the family. Julian would face trials and tribulations of his own as the last emperor of the Constantinian dynasty‚ but with the death of Constantius II‚ we see the end of the rule of the sons of the Great Constantine. Constantius was entombed with his father in the Church of the Holy Apostles in Constantinople.

Grand Conventional Festival of the Britons‚ designed by Charles Hamilton Smith and engraved by Robert Havell senior‚ 1815. Source: Royal Academy of Arts‚ London   When considering the peoples of Iron Age Europe‚ the term that usually springs to mind is the word “Celt.” For many years‚ scholars used this term to categorize a group of people who inhabited a wide swathe of Europe from Spain to Britain‚ and France to Transylvania. In recent years however‚ studies have investigated the origins of the term “Celt” to question whether its use is an oversimplification of a wide range of unique peoples who all existed in Europe during the Iron Age.   The Origin of the Word “Celt” Map of tribes of Gaul‚ via HubPages.com   The first mention of the word “Celt” comes from the ancient Greek‚ “Keltoi.” Hecataeus of Miletus was a Greek geographer who used the term to describe a group of people living near Massalia (modern-day Marseille in France). After this‚ the Greek geographer and historian Herodotus also used the term Keltoi to refer to a group of people living near the Danube and talk about those living in the far west in Europe.   It was not‚ however‚ until the Romans that detailed writings emerged regarding the Celtae‚ after a group of Gauls led by Brennus‚ reached and sacked Rome itself in 390 BCE. This event helped contribute to the widespread use of the term “Celt” to refer to the tribes north of Italy and Gaul (modern-day France).   La Tene and the Art of the Celts The Battersea Shield‚ British Iron Age‚ via the British Museum   One of the reasons that historians used the term “Celt” to refer to a wide range of people was the similarities in their artistic styles. During excavations in Switzerland in the 19th century‚ an assemblage of metalwork was discovered at Lake Neuchâtel. This style of art took the name of the nearby village‚ becoming known as “La Tene” art. Following on from this‚ many similar objects were discovered in other areas of Europe including Britain with examples coming from depositions in the river Thames such as at Battersea and Wandsworth. The examples from Britain however‚ often contain unique stylistic designs which could imply a difference between British craftspeople and those who were making similar objects on the continent.   One of the main characteristics of La Tene art is the intricate‚ almost hypnotizing swirling lines that weave and interlace around various pieces. Abstract human and faunal figures also decorate weapons‚ jewelry‚ cooking vessels‚ and other metal objects. One example of this form comes from the impressive Gundestrup cauldron which was found in Denmark and dates to around the first century BCE. The artistic motifs that decorate it suggest that it was made in the Balkans and possibly arrived in Denmark through the exchange of gifts and trade.   Celtic Languages Map of Celtic Languages in Europe‚ via Wikimedia Commons   The similarities between languages across different regions of Europe is often cited as direct evidence of wider Celtic homogeneity. Similar Celtic languages can be found in Scotland‚ Wales‚ Ireland‚ Cornwall‚ the Isle of Man‚ and Brittany where there has been a continuation of native speakers or‚ in some cases‚ a linguistic revival. These languages all derive from the mutually intelligible languages spoken in Europe during the Iron Age which has been used as an indicator to suggest the link between various peoples who have all been labeled as Celts.   Apart from Irish and Welsh‚ the surviving Celtic languages are considered to be at risk due to the external pressures of English and French. Despite this‚ there is a wealth of knowledge preserved in oral traditions as well as literary recordings. There is‚ however‚ still a huge amount of literature deriving from these folk traditions that is yet to be studied and translated‚ meaning that this is still a very active field of research for scholars.   The Celts in the Modern Day The Gundestrup Cauldron‚ 3rd-1st century BCE‚ via Britannica   The term “Celt” was originally used as a way to differentiate a certain group of people from the Greeks and the Romans yet in the modern day‚ it has become almost a badge of honor for people around the world who trace their heritage back to the so-called Celtic regions of Britain and France. Furthermore‚ it is a word that people identify with as an umbrella term for the music‚ language‚ art‚ and traditions that continue to offer a sense of difference and ancient heritage.   Many traditions still exist in these regions and the use of language ties modern people to their heritage. The word “Celtic” for people who come from these regions such as those in Britain‚ is often used to acknowledge a difference in culture between themselves and the modern-day English‚ who derived a considerable amount of their culture‚ language‚ and genetics from the various Germanic and Scandinavian incursions. This began after the withdrawal of the Roman Empire from Britannia in the 5th century and the following waves of migration from the Angles‚ Saxons‚ Jutes‚ and Frisians from the Netherlands‚ Germany‚ and Denmark. This was then followed by the Scandinavian incursions during the Viking period at the end of the 8th century. It is this acknowledgment of the various genetic and ethnic origins of the modern-day British that has continued to fuel the debates between Celtic and Germanic origins.   The Celts in Britannia  Reconstructed round houses‚ Wales‚ via Museum of Wales   When considering historical sources regarding the use of the term “Celt‚” it is important to note that no sources quoted the inhabitants of Britain during the Iron Age as being Celts. Romans such as Caesar‚ Tacitus‚ and Strabo however‚ noted a similar language and culture in comparison to that of Gaul.   Cutting-edge DNA analysis of the peoples of Britain has also contributed significantly to the debate about the Celtic origins of the Britons. The latest research suggests that in Britain‚ there was no single “Celtic” genetic group and that the Cornish‚ for example‚ are genetically closer to the DNA of other English groups than to the Welsh or the Scottish. The evidence from DNA analysis also shows a migration of people into Britain after the last Ice Age but before the Roman period. This most likely suggests that the Iron Age population of Britain was generally established before the Iron Age‚ leading to genetic differences between Britons and the rest of the Celtic areas in Europe. This is supported by a large genetic study that highlighted a significant migration into Britain during the Bronze Age‚ yet before the Iron Age as previously thought by historians based on Roman writings. Furthermore‚ there is no archaeological evidence of a large-scale invasion of Britain in the Iron Age before the Romans arrived.   Artist’s impression of a group of ‘Celtic’ warriors by Angus McBride via Realm of History   Another difference between the British population and those on the continent was their differing forms of architecture. In Britain‚ the dominant form of dwelling was the roundhouse which had existed since at least the Bronze Age‚ suggesting a continuity of practice. In contrast‚ the dominant form of domestic dwelling on the continent was rectangular in shape in a continuation of a practice potentially derived from the Neolithic period.   Final Thoughts on the Celts Brennus and His Share of the Spoils‚ by Paul Jamin‚ 1893‚ via Wikimedia Commons   So‚ were there ever any Celts in Britain during the Iron Age? When considering the linguistic‚ archaeological‚ and genetic evidence‚ it would appear that there is still some confusion; the speaking of a similar language and the creation of similar artistic styles do not necessarily indicate kinship with another region. This‚ however‚ all depends on how you define a “Celt.”   Archaeological and genetic evidence would suggest that there is a similar‚ ancient ancestry although a division had been created between the inhabitants of Britain and those of Gaul before the Iron Age. It is therefore incorrect to label the Britons as Celts. On the other hand‚ this raises many contemporary issues about the definitions surrounding race and ethnicity‚ especially seeing as we have no true record of what these people referred to themselves as.   It would seem prudent for the moment to consider that genetically‚ the Britons were different from the Celts in Europe‚ however‚ a similar language‚ artistic style‚ and culture indicate very close ties and a definitive mixing of people and ideas rather than a replacement of one population by another.

(Natural News) Under Operation Warp Speed‚ the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) hastily approved experimental mRNA technology and sold it under the label “vaccine.” One of the companies…

LifeSiteNews welcomes thoughtful‚ respectful comments that add useful information or insights. Demeaning‚ hostile or propagandistic comments‚ and streams not related to the storyline‚ will be removed.LSN…