PHRYGIA, FINANCE, AND
The Assyrian conquests must have released a very flood of bullion on to the
markets of the Middle East. Steeply rising prices that would have followed
must have made it more profitable for bankers and money lenders and
manufacturers from this most ancient area to look further afield for lands
where money as denoted by treasure was not so plentiful, and therefore
wherein such treasure might serve them best.
The gold, silver, and
bullion with which, after 671 B.C. and the Assyrian thrust into Egypt during
the second phase of Assyrian conquest, their store houses and strong rooms
were overflowing, could be put to better use than lying inactive in these
same store houses or strong rooms, at Nineveh, Babylon, Lagash, or Ur or
wherever they were situated.
The privately issued electrum staters of Lydia of the seventh and sixth
century B.C. denoted a highly significant possibility... Lydia was the
source of something Assyria badly needed. The first thing such military
organization such as existed in Assyria would need, would be financial
organization, and secondly, stemming from its financial organization,
organization above all towards the purpose of the purchase of the best of
Phrygia was famous throughout the ancient world for its arms.(1)
Lydia bordered on and indeed may very well have been part of Phrygia in
earlier times. Hence the secret of the electrum staters. Assyria needed
Phrygian arms and at the same time had to accept such financial terns as the
suppliers of such arms decreed, and it may safely be assured that such terms
stipulated payment was to be made in gold, silver, or electrum.
The extraordinary treasure of such as Sadyattes, latter dispossessed and
executed by Croesus, cannot be explained any other way. It had to derive
from the plunder gathered up by Assyria from all its conquests, as much as
from the river washings of Lydia. The evidence of the gold artifacts, of the
ancient civilizations of Anatolia of thousands of years previous to this
time, such as Hacilar, Catal Huyuk, Dorak,(2) would indicate that the
Anatolian rivers had been well washed for gold many ages before (3)...
Although according to the Guide to the principal coins of the Greeks
published by the British Museum, pages 12-13, electrum for the Lydian
coinages came from the Pactolus river, the question still stands:
happened to the enormous gold, silver, and electrum plunder, of Assyria;
that had been taken from Aram, Israel, Arabia, and above all from Egypt?”
The great temple cities such as Karnak must have literally gleamed with gold
and silver monuments and finishing. According to Diodorus in 57 B.C.:
that there was no city under the sun so adorned with so many and stately
monuments of gold, silver, and ivory, and multitudes of colossi and
obelisks, each cut out of an entire stone...
...The decorations of these buildings were as magnificent as their design.
The walls and pylons were covered with paintings and sculpture, the gates
and pillars were overlaid with gold and the floors with silver, which, to
the Egyptians was a metal hardly less precious than gold itself.” (4)
The electrum obelisks of Hatsepsut (5)
as removed by Ashurbanipal from before
the Temple of Amon at Karnak in 661 B.C., contained, according to Breasted
2500 talents of electrum,(6) and according to other writers as much as 2900
talent; not to speak of other more massive plunder stripped from temple and
The electrum from the obelisks alone, assuming the correctness of the
percentages of gold, silver, and copper given on the cylinder reported by Desroches-Noblecourt to be in the Louvre, as being 75%, 22%, 3%,
respectively,(7) would value at $186,648,000 (166,650 lbs. at approximately
$70.00 to the fine ounce), having a buying power infinitely greater than in
Skillfully used as the basis of a pyramid of ledger credit page entry
money, it would be sufficient to maintain the finances of great enterprise,
if not of kingdoms. Lydia, peasant kingdom that had emerged from the ruins
of Phrygia after the Cimmerian invasion,(8) could very well have functioned
in its institution in a similar manner to Switzerland during the last few
hundred years; somewhat in the nature of a bullion broker’s or international
Which might account, perhaps, for the ferocity of the
destruction by Cyrus of the hapless Croesus, who was said to have been
flayed alive; as example no doubt to other kings, and to remind them that
while their power was national, there was another power which was
international; above and beyond the power of petty kings...
Similarly, the other metals, copper, bronze, and iron, no longer deemed
precious, and which therefore were often left on the battlefield, would fall
into the hands of members of those semi-criminal castes such as Sadyattes,
previously mentioned, who would control the camp followers that stripped the
dead and thus garnered this scrap metal. These metals offered considerable
profit by way of manufacturing counterfeits of the currencies of those
states wherein base metal currencies were used...
Many Northern states and cities to which considerable industry was being
transferred, used copper or iron fiduciary currencies in earlier times. Such
was the iron currency of Clazomenae mentioned by Aristotle (10) and the
spits of Pre-Pheidon Argos, examples of which were dedicated to the Goddess
in the Temple of Hera at Argos at the commencement of silver coinage by Pheidon, and were actually exhumed from the place of their dedication by the
archaeologists who explored that site.(11)
Herein would have been fertile
field for profit for those that dealt in money in Greece or elsewhere, for
Though the Greek himself obviously must have been the foundation of Greek
industry, the Aramean or the Phoenician, bringing the ways of money and
banking and who brought an alphabet and writing to Greece, became the
cornerstone of that industry. He also brought agencies from the great
banking houses of Babylonia such as that firm mentioned by Professor Sayce
in Babylonian Literature, which flourished from the reign of Nabopolassar,
the father of Nebuchadnezzar, to the reign of Darius Hystaspes;
approximately one hundred years; and of which evidence remains in the clay
cheques and deeds found by some Arabs in a great earthen jar.(12)
time of Professor Sayce, which is nearly a hundred years ago, much more
evidence of the existence of powerful banking and merchant institutions has
come to light; outstandingly those of the Egibi Sons, and the Murassu, who,
according to Professor Humphrey Michell in his work, The Economics of
Ancient Greece (P. 334), carried on very large and complicated business;
even by modern standards.
Just as Babylonian business and banking houses maintained extensive branches
in the Sumerian cities, such as at Lagash where their records were found to
exceed the records of the king,(13) so it may safely be assumed that they
maintained branches within any state within the limits of the communications
of the day, and where profit was to be made.
The sturdy intelligent people of Greece were a fertile field for the renewal
of industry and trade after the disturbance that must have followed the rise
in prices deriving from the augmentation of precious metal reserves
resulting from the flow of Assyrian plunder on to the bullion markets, and
later, with Babylonia once again supreme following the victories of
Nabopolassar in 605 B.C., from the similar flow of Babylonian plunder.
the same time Greece was a place of refuge from the war clouds drifting over
all that Near East world, and the stench of slaughter that followed the
It would not be long before the skill of the Aramean at letters, money,
counterfeit or otherwise, and in organization of industry, stirred the
peasant kingdoms of Greece. Industries rose under the guidance of these
refugees similar to those of their homelands, to be later followed by a
money economy as to the silver standards of Babylonia, and by the systematic
spreading of money madness amongst the landed aristocracy of Greece, thus
separating them from their peoples for whom they had been the hereditary
guides. For their peoples and their labors had now become but cyphers;
desirable wealth assessed as according to the figures in the banker’s book.
The people who drifted into the cities as slave or freeman, and found
employment in the organized manufacturies of these strangers who by now were
calling themselves Greeks, and were by now bearing Greek names, not
unnaturally gave their allegiance to that new hand that seemed to feed them.
Eagerly, just as in today, they drank at the fountain of hatred of their
former masters, who through their sanction of the activities of these “New
Greeks”, and connivance with them in respect to the new money system they
set up, betrayed both their people and themselves...
Among the first steps towards the total monetization of the wealth and
labor of the Greek peoples to a precious metal standard controllable by the
great banking houses of Babylonia, was the permitting of the striking of a
silver coinage on the island of Aegina by Pheidon,(14) “progressive” King of
Argos in 680 B.C., similar to the private coinage that was issued in Lydia
prior to Croesus.
“Progressive” King of Argos meant in this case a king
ready to listen to the blandishments of money power, luring him into that
trap which was the use of precious metal currency, over which he could have
relatively little control; since silver as its base was to be obtained only
at great expense by slave labour at localities too often far distant, and,
relative to localities yielding iron or copper, few and far between. True,
the silver used by the moneyers of Aegina probably came from Laureion, in
sight across the sea.
But even though the source of supply was so close at
hand, a coinage of which so small a unit represented so much value, placed
the economy, through the practices of banking, in the hands of the
international bullion controllers.
That the bankers, known as trapezitae, conducted almost the same business as
bankers today is clearly indicated by the article in Seffert’s Classical
Dictionary, even if, as the word trapezitae indicates, they but sat at a
bench in the market place, instead of sitting in gilded halls surmounted by
sixty story buildings, as indeed they do today.
Within the limits of clay
tablet and stylus, the same confidence game was operated, though probably
there were few who understood it as being such;... yesterday it was a
conspiracy against the men of a city, or a relatively small state; today a
conspiracy against the whole world. Those that have their hands on the
throttle of this all embracing evil do not however bear the faintest
resemblance to whole hearted demons in hell, or gods who in their mountain
halls contemptuously plan the total eradication of man who may be their
They are but pudgy and sly little men as much
overwhelmed by the monster they have raised, as are the foolish nations that
permitted them so to do.
Of Ancient Greek banking Seffert says:
“...Bankers were called by the
Greeks trapezitae because they sat at tables in the market places, the
centre of all business transactions. They acted as money changers exchanging
for a commission heavy money or gold into smaller coin, and the moneys of
different systems with each other. In commercial cities they would do a
considerable trade in this way, the different standards and the uncertainty
of the stamping of the coins in Greece creating a great demand for their
They also acted as money lenders both on a small and a large
scale. Finally they received money on deposit. People placed their money
with them for safe custody, partly to facilitate the management of it. The
depositors, according to their convenience, either drew out sums of money
themselves, or commissioned their banker to make payment to a third person.
In this line the business of the banks was considerable. If a citizen had a
large sum of money circulating in business, he probably preferred to put it
in a bank and to hand over to the banker the business of making his
Strangers too found that the banks offered them such facilities
that they were glad to make considerable use of them.(15) The bankers kept
strict account of all monies in their charge. If a person were making a
payment to another who was a depositor at the same bank, the banker would
simply transfer the requisite sum from one account to another. The bankers
were generally well known from the public character of their occupation, and
they naturally gained great experience in business. Consequently their
advice and assistance were often asked for in the ordinary affairs of life.
They would be called in to attest the conclusion of contracts, and would
take charge of sums of money, the title to which was disputed, and of
important documents. Business of this kind was generally in the hands of
resident aliens.” (16)
The above quotation from the great German scholar,
Oskar Seffert, leaves
those of us who understand the origins and meaning of today’s banking,
little doubt, as previously pointed out, that within the limits of clay
tablet and stylus, every fraudulent practice known to banking would have
Also the commonly accepted idea that instruments used in
foreign trade, such as Letters of Credit, Bills of Exchange, etc. were a
discovery of the 12th Century A.D., is further clearly proved erroneous by
“Strangers too found that the banks offered them such
facilities that they were glad to make considerable use of them.” (17)
Therefore behind the monetary reforms of King Pheidon of Argos we must see
not the wonder of what so many so-called scholars would call the arrival of
the “invention” of coinage in Greece, but the comings and goings of strange
aliens with letters from mysterious “Important” men who dwelt in Tyre, or
Sidon, or Sardis, or who dwelt in Babylonia itself; everything to be in the
name of “progress”, everything to be joy and light!...
The only thing our
poor peasant king had to ask himself was...
“Joy and light for whom... Us or
these panders, pornographers, and luxury pedlars who now flock to our
Very soon, no doubt, the answer became apparent. Behind the Aramaic speaking
banker came the slave trader, and it was not long before the poor people
found that the king’s law was no longer for them, and was but a measure
behind which these glib and double talking “Bankers” operated...
protect the people’s savings!”...no doubt was their cry, yesterday, as in
Such silver coinage as was produced at Aegina or Argos would have been no
more than a few seen symbols, the apex of an inverted pyramid of unseen or
abstract symbols of which only the money master really understood the
meaning and purpose, and only he knew how to manipulate. Through
manipulation of these “Credits” in relation to the silver that people now
thought was their money, King Pheidon himself could have been tricked into
believing himself a slave because he could not repay his so-called “debt”.
However the banker needed the king as such, for a while yet no doubt.
In the meantime peasantry and lesser nobility were drawn into this trap of
irredeemable debt, and, as the king’s law had to be upheld, they and their
families would be sold into that cruel slave system that was growing up all
over the Mediterranean world and through which, money economy, now grown
into a very monster, could find docile labor for the dreary grind of the
new methods of semi-mass production in manufacture, such as it had brought
into being, and against which the reforms of Solon as described in the
previous chapter, were directed.
History should not be misled by the Greek names of those significant figures
and families concerned with money and money power at that time, whether in
Lydia or in Greece... Oskar Seffert states quite clearly that the bankers or
trapezitae were resident aliens.(18) Controlling the undercurrents of city
life as undoubtedly they would have so done, in those days it would have
been no more difficult than it is in these days to secure the services of a
front man to promote their interests, and secure them citizenship if
Just as aliens who seek trade and power amongst whatever people
they maybe, so often change their names to suit the circumstances while
retaining allegiance to that group into which they were born, so it was in
that day, nearly three thousand years ago. In the early days of the Greek
cities, citizenship was easy to obtain and persons with pretence at power,
influence and money, in a society where worship of money had replaced
worship of the gods, in truth, would have no great difficulty in that
Out of the weakening of what was left of the true power of kingly rule at
Athens, such as descended from Mycenaean Greece, and consequent growth of
“Aristocratic” democracy, doubtless deriving from concession to
international money power for its assistance against the Dorian previous to
1100 B.C., and before whom it appears the city of Athens never fell, came
the replacement of the title
Wanax indicating god-king reigning in earthly
splendor, for that of
Archon-Basileus of lesser degree.(19)
Out of the
further weakening of such aristocracy of the Greeks as later existed,
whether Achaean, Ionian, or Dorian, and the soul destruction sown amongst
them as consequence of their betrayal into slavery and abuse of their
followers who had so trusted them and looked to them for guidance, derived
those conditions out of which the so-called tyrant rose to power.
Out of the
involvement of the natural leaders of the people (20) with things ignoble and
inimical to their own kind, such as trade and “Money-making”, and with
strange luxuries and vices, rose those men, often traitors to their own
class, who fronted for the conspiratorial money power of the age...
men steered the restless aspirations of the wage slaves of the cities; those
dispossessed masses so easily stirred to active resentment against their
former leaders deriving from the ancient nobility; and who, of course, had
no more understanding than themselves of that force by which they were both
1. “But I perhaps, owing to the number of advocates may be classed in the
common body; the battle of Cannae has made you a sufficiently respectable
accuser. We have seen many men slain, not at Trasimene but at Servilius. Who
was not wounded there with Phrygian steel ?...” Cicero: Orationes, “Pro S.
Roscius” (Vol. I, P. 65; C.D. Yonge; London, 1883.).
2. Kenneth Pearson: The Dorak Affair, London, 1967.
3. Strabo, XIII, iv, 5. (Del Mar: History of the Precious Metals, P. 51.)
4. Christopher Dawson: Age of the Gods, P. 295.
5. James H. Breasted: History of Egypt, P. 281.
6. Ibid. P. 559.
7. Christiane Desroches-Noblecourt: Tutankhamen, P. 33. New York, 1963.
8. Encyclopaedia of World History, P. 37, Boston, 1948.
9. The fact that after the destruction of Croesus by Cyrus, 547 B.C., Sardis
remained the principal mint for the whole Persian Empire, and for which it
turned out Sigloi as to the Babylonian standard, gives further strength to
10. Frederick William Madden, M.R.A.S.: Coins of the Jews, P.29; London;
11. Charles Seltsman: Greek Coins, pp. 34-35.
12. Frederick William Madden, M.R.A.S.: Coins of the Jews, P. 6. (footnote).
13. Cambridge Ancient History, P. 392, Vol. 1.
14. According to the table on P. 35, “Greek Coins” by C. Seltsman, the
Aeginetan drachma was established without any doubt at its given standard,
because in the time of Pheidon, the ratio of silver to iron was 400:1. He
clearly had been advised to establish the new silver drachmas and obolos so
that they would have the same purchasing power as the now discarded iron
obolos and “Drax”...... according to their valuation in an International
market where money was metal by weight.
15. Obviously for discounting Bills of Exchange, raising money against Bills
of Lading, Warehouse Receipts, and the realization into that which
circulated as money of the promissory note issued as between friends or
16. Oskar Seffert: Dictionary of Classical Antiquities, P. 91.
17. Visiting Merchants and Ships’ Captains.
18. Oskar Seffert: Dictionary of Classical Antiquities, P. 91.
19. Jacquetta Hawkes: Dawn of the Gods, P. 262; New York; 1968.
20. Referring to the Hellenic terminology in connection with banking
transactions and professions etc. Professor Heichelheim of vast scholarship
“That the banking transactions of the individual bankers, money
lenders, and debtors influenced the whole economic life and even, to a
certain degree, the intellectual development in Attica, the territories of
the Delian League and in many other polis territories of our period, since
the fifth, if not occasionally sixth centuries B.C. will be obvious from the
above list which has a surprising number of specializations...”
Fritz Heichelheim: An Ancient Economic History, Vol. II, pp. 196-197; Leyden;
Back to Contents
TYRANT AND TRAPEZITAE
Of the tyrants of Greece and Asia Minor in ancient times, the learned
Professor Heichelheim wrote:(1)
“These tyrants were for the most part members of the nobility themselves
who had made the grade using the new political and economic possibilities of
their time to overthrow their own equals and to subdue their whole home
The tyrants were often compelled to introduce the coin economy pattern into
the area over which they ruled, or at least to promote its development
officially, in order to gain the upper hand over their enemies...
stabilize the position of the peasantry on the land, and to expand and
rebuild state economy, a central distribution of money and goods in kind
partly directed towards mercenaries, bodyguards and various political
friends, and partly indirectly to the masses of poor people in the form of
wages paid for extensive building operations and improvements, is
characteristic of tyrant economy...”
The above remarks of Professor Heichelheim indicate there were “new
political and economic possibilities” in that period 650-500 B.C. when the
tyrannies most of all flourished...
The question then becomes, what were
these “new political and economic possibilities ?”...
The answer is arrived
at readily; they derived from the activities of the agents of the
international silver bullion brokers, who, from ports such as Argos, Athens,
and Aegina where King Pheidon struck the first Greek silver coinage c.680
BC., promoted the luxury traders who sold their wares from wigs to harlots
as against the new silver coinage or promise thereof.
clearly were for those who assisted in the monetization of the city, and all
its activities and possessions, and its population, man, woman, and child,
and their possessions too, and thereby assisted in the firm establishment of
the rule of bankers, trade, and traders, as against the gods ruling over
mankind living in his natural order.
“The aristocracies refused political equality to the landless traders and
manufacturers, the peasants were oppressed by the rich and encouraged to get
into debt (as in these days) and then were reduced to slavery and exile; slaves began to
compete with free labor. Ambitious individuals capitalized this discontent
to overthrow the constituted government and establish themselves as tyrants
in all the Greek cities with the notable exception of Sparta...” (2)
The situation is very clear.
The kings and aristocracies as descended from
ancient days, as a derivative of their folly in permitting the unrestricted
activities of the new bankers, who were now well established in all the
major cities of Greece outside of Sparta, saw a class of manufacturers and
entrepreneurs come into being, largely foreigners and men of lowly origin.
These men, more often than not with the means of nobility but the outlook of
slaves, were clearly a serious threat to kings and nobility and the order
In the same manner during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries A.D., the
worthy tradesmen of London, while still deferring to the natural nobility of
the land, more and more realized, that they too were lords of the land
through control of labor by the wage rates and needed little encouragement
from that true source of their power, the bullion brokers, towards hatred of
a government (3) which still gave them little say, for all the wealth that
they were possessed of according to the new standards.
This government still
continued, at least until Charles I, to consider one of its main duties was
to prevent the oppression of the poor and the trusting,(4) regardless of the
so-called “needs of trade”.
The similar class that rose in Greece some two thousand years previously,
more and more realized that they were the new reality, and that they were
now in actuality the lords of the land through labor, which they owned
outright as slaves, or controlled as through daily wages. If the land itself
they still did not own and control, it mattered not; for there were those
voices that told them that land too was but a trade and a tool in the new
As their textiles (as at Megara), or pottery (as at Corinth), that
every ship leaving harbor carried to the ends of the earth, so the land of
the great lord was but the capital investment that grew the food that he the
manufacturer purchased for himself and his slaves or the raw materials
needed for his particular trade; and he himself, in the money creator’s
kingdom on earth, was as assessable in coin as was potter, weaver, or armourer.
The land owning nobleman was a man controllable as themselves
through the arts of taxation in terms of money, could they but institute a
system of government in which the natural ruler had no more power to rule
No doubt these worthy tradesmen of Megara, or Corinth, or Athens, led on by
the attitude of their true masters, the trapezitae, the money creators,
agents of those great and ancient banking houses of Babylon city, said to
themselves of the natural lords of Hellas
“Who are these men ?”...
their fine manners and clothing, we could buy them up a hundred times did
they but know it !”
And so the stage was set for the arrival of the tyrant financed into
existence by the bankers towards the total destruction of the old way of
life, which still had within it the seeds of a strength sufficient to root
out its enemies such as, in the case of Sparta, had been outstandingly
proven by the renewal of the ancient life system through the financial and
social reforms of Lycurgus.
Classes of manufacturers and entrepreneurs,
contemptuous of a nobility that seemed to have betrayed its trust, were
easily stirred to envy and resentment, and the work of destruction by the
tyrant received little or no opposition.
“In order to level the class of large landowners and nobles economically,
Theagenes of Megara simply allowed their herds of cattle to be slaughtered
without remuneration. A frequent political device of tyrants from Asia Minor
to Sicily was to murder or banish nobles, confiscate their possessions, and
redistribute their wealth amongst the poor.” (5)
The poor, needless to say, soon returned to being poor again...
“The poor ye
shall always have with you.”
The poor merely being those who trust that
their rulers are attending to serious matters as indicated by their position
in the scale of life, such as governing.
The word “poor” having existed, of
course, long before the crafty banker, standing in the shade beside the ways
of life, arranged it that measure of poverty and riches was in that number
of (privately issued) units of exchange in which a man could be assessed
according to success or failure in the conflict of life, as he the banker
had established it.
The tyrant, therefore, was that force by which international money power as
it derived from the control of silver bullion and the slave markets,
destroyed all resistance to its total ownership of life and labor and human
hope... The status of all, slave or free, in some degree, depended on their
relations with the trapezitae who presided at their table in the agora; and
should they be kings or rulers of states, no doubt their destinies would be
much influenced by those shadowy figures furtively watching from the
counting houses of far away
According to the special nature
of the times, the tyrant, in his capacity as ruler, would above all be
guided instrument; but that the tyrant no more understood the true
significance of his existence than do these so-called revolutionary
“leaders” of today, is a certainty...
The so-called “revolutions” of today are clearly similar in their origins to
those of the time of the tyrants; the main difference being more of a
technicality... Until 1870 A.D. the arbitrary valuation of gold bullion as
according to the decision of the bullion brokers, was common denominator of
values internationally, with silver bullion in second place at the ratio as
decided by the leading states; but still rarely varying a great deal from
that ratio decided on nearly 2000 years ago by Julius Caesar and his
financial advisors, of 12:1.(6)
After the demonetization of silver in almost
all the major states of the world, in the seventies of the last century,(7)
the common denominator of values was gold alone, with silver just another
commodity moving up and down on world markets according to supply and
More than ample evidence exists of those persons designated international
bankers in “Modern Times” as also the instigative factor in the principle
so-called revolutions of the last three hundred years.
Commander Guy Carr,(8) the so-called English revolution was totally the work
of the international bullion brokers who seem at that time to have been
lodged in Amsterdam, although the loan of silver bullion to Queen Elizabeth
I (9) for the re-coinage that took place shortly after her accession to the
throne as negotiated by the famous “Sicile”,(10) later Lord Burghley, came
Some of the Crypto-Jews of the Commonwealth,(11) of whom many would have
been in England during the reign of Charles I, would also appear to have
been a factor in such revolution as witting or unwitting agents of the
Amsterdam bullion brokers...(12) The main designer of the events of those
days seems to have been a Manasseh Ben Israel, “a remarkable character,” who
apparently took the initiative in the financing of Cromwell;(13) which
enabled Cromwell to obtain the best of arms, the first requisite of the
would-be conqueror throughout history.
The arrival of the Spanish and Portuguese Marranos (14) in Holland in 1593
A.D., with the consequent harnessing of the Dutch, a seafaring people,
naturally aggressive, to their world wide trade activities, and the
resultant so-called “prosperity”, immediately produced its impact in
The re-growth of the commercial power of these “New Dutch”, more
especially as deriving from the bullion trade which they seemed to continue
to control internationally, principally due to the connections they
continued to maintain in Spain, directed towards them a great part of the
flood of the precious metals which was being wrung out of the wretched
natives of South America particularly; not to speak of that which came from
Japan, China, and India, of which not so much seems to be known.(15)
sooner did these precious metals arrive in Spain or Portugal than almost
immediately they moved on to other parts in settlement of trade debit
balances created largely by the Spanish wars in Europe, particularly in
This superfluity of the precious metals in Northern Europe certainly was one
of the instigative factors, in the growth of “Banking”, which had spread
from Venice and Genoa, to Amsterdam, and from thence to London,(17) where,
evinced by the activities of the goldsmiths, it had set itself up against
kings, as the whole story of the downfall of Charles I would indicate.
The political picture of Northern Europe derived a great deal of its
changing character from the rise in prices which came about both as a result
of the relatively tremendous influx of new precious metals at that time, and
as a result of the growth of “Banking”, that is private abstract money
creation, which affected prices equally with that precious metal that could
be seen as it circulated as money.
Kings, often in the hands of the venal
advisors to whom the age gave rise, were no longer able to make both ends
meet, and not understanding the true nature of the activities of the bankers
or goldsmiths, they neither knew how to put a stop to such activities nor,
if they permitted them, how to tax them...
The sullen resistance experienced by Charles I from the puritanical and
self-righteous burghers of the City of London,(18) most of whom were by then
deeply beholden to the goldsmiths for their finances, who, in their turn
were no doubt beholden to the Amsterdam bullion brokers for the gold they
sometimes needed in a hurry when rumor went round that their receipts which
circulated as money, were largely false and had nothing behind them except
lies, may be traced to these same bullion brokers of Amsterdam...
Their policy above all required the weakening of kingship in England, for
the “Banking” monopoly they saw they might come to institute in England,
could not flourish with a king on the throne such as Charles who truly
regarded himself as the Lord’s anointed... A king who was aware of the
source of his power, even if not widely instructed therein, that is to say,
who was aware of the true meaning of monetary creation and emission relative
to his kingship, was not much to their liking....
The reinstitution of the
office of a Royal Exchanger, abolished by Henry VIII in 1539 on the advice
of a Sir Thomas Gresham,(19) was also not much to their liking, nor the
seizure by Charles of the £130,000 deposited in the Tower supposedly by the
London merchants, reputed to have come from Spain en route to Dunkirk,
Spanish possession at that time...
The reinstitution of the office of Royal
Exchanger meant that one of the major sources of revenue of the goldsmiths,
and therefore their masters, the bullion brokers was cut off: that which
obtained from the exchange of coins, foreign or domestic; which meant,
therefore, they were denied the opportunity to clip, or sweat, or retain for
export those full-weight coins that came their way.(20)
“The unsafe condition of a Bank under a Monarchy.” (21)
These words of Pepys indicate the trend of thought of certain circles at the
time. Although Charles I could not be considered the most effective
opposition to banking and its proponents, nevertheless, he was in the way;
even if the cure to him—Cromwell—proved perhaps to be even more in the way!
Cromwell’s “Bills of Public Faith”, of which very little record remains, a
true currency being intrinsically valueless, state issued, and
inconvertible, must have been cause for grave misgivings on the part of the
goldsmiths, and all concerned, as to whether they had done right in
supporting the enemies of the king!
It was not long after the return to the
throne of England of the Stuart Line in the person of the amenable Charles
II, in 1660, that these “Bills of Public Faith,” the real key to
sovereignty, were repudiated;(22) showing that the son had even less
understanding of the realities of money than had the father.(23)
To return to Cromwell and the principal factors that lead up to his success,
and his assumption of the powers of tyranny: when it became clear that
Cromwell was as “suitable” a man as could be found to fit the needs of the
occasion, Manasseh Ben Israel supplied him with the gifted Fernandez Carvajal, for the reorganization of his army, which became known as the
Trained revolutionaries then poured into the country,
presiding over whom was the Portuguese Ambassador, a De Souza, who loaned
them the diplomatic immunity of his house for their meetings. One such
revolutionary was the man known today as Calvin, whose father had been
fiscal agent to a prominent French Bishop.(24)
These revolutionary leaders, besides developing the technique of spreading
religious differences, also exploited the use of truculent mobs, a practice
known to this class of people from most ancient times, for the gaining of
According to Commander Guy Carr, who is a relatively recent
writer on this subject: (25)
“The evidence which absolutely convicts Oliver Cromwell of participating in
the revolutionary plot was obtained by Lord Alfred Douglas, who edited a
weekly review known as Plain English published by the North British
In an article which appeared in the issue of Sept. 3rd
1921, he explained that he and his friend, Mr. L.D. Van Valckert of
Amsterdam, Holland, had come into possession of a missing volume of records
of the Synagogue of Mulheim. This volume had been lost during the Napoleonic
Wars. The volume contained records of letters written to and answered by the
directors of the Synagogue.
They are written in German. One entry dated June 16th, 1647 reads: From O.C.
(i.e.) Oliver Cromwell to Ebenezer Pratt.
‘In return for financial support will advocate admission... to England;
this however impossible while Charles living. Charles cannot be executed
without trial, adequate grounds for which do not at present exist. Therefore
advise that Charles be assassinated, but will have nothing to do with the
arrangements for procuring an assassin, though willing to help in his escape.’
In reply to this dispatch the records show E. Pratt wrote a letter dated
July 12th, 1647 addressed to Oliver Cromwell.
‘Will grant financial aid as soon as Charles removed and... admitted.(26)
Assassination too dangerous. Charles should be given an opportunity to
escape. His recapture will then make trial and execution possible. The
support will be liberal but useless to discuss terms until trial commences.’
On November 12th, that same year, Charles was given the opportunity to
escape. He was, of course, recaptured. Hollis and Ludlow, authorities on
this chapter of history, are both on record as considering the flight as the
stratagem of Cromwell. After Charles had been recaptured, events moved
apace. Cromwell had the British Parliament purged of most of the members he
knew were loyal to the King.
Notwithstanding this drastic action, when the
house sat all night on December 6th, 1648, the majority agreed,
concessions offered by the king were satisfactory to a settlement.’
Any such settlement would have disqualified Cromwell from receiving the
blood money promised him by the international money barons through their
agent E. Pratt, so Cromwell struck again. He ordered Colonel Pryde to purge
Parliament of those members who had voted in favour of a settlement with the
King. What then happened is referred to in history books as ‘Pryde’s purge’.
When the purge was finished, fifty members remained. They are recorded as
the ‘Rump Parliament’.
They usurped absolute power. On January 30th, 1649,
he was publicly beheaded in front of the banqueting house at Whitehall,
London... Oliver Cromwell received his blood money just as Judas had done.” (27)
On the same somewhat obscure page of history, Professor
out in his History of the Bank of England,(28) that Cromwell’s best known
historians pay little attention to the subject of his relations with the
Jews and their return to England. Carlyle and Morley devoting no more than a
page to this highly controversial event.(29) The reader gains the impression
that more was to be said on the subject...
He asserts himself:
certain that as soon as Charles I was dead, the Jews attempted to return to
The following statements by Benjamin Franklin in reference to the causes of
the American Revolution are equally illuminating:
“About this time (the time of the Treaty of Paris, 1763), Benjamin Franklin
made a visit to England. While there he was asked how he accounted for the
prosperous conditions of the colonies. His reply was: ‘That is simple. It
is only because in the colonies we issue our own money. It is called
“Colonial Scrip” and we issue it in the proper proportion to the demands of
trade and industry.’ ”
(See Senate Document No. 23, Page 98, by Robert L.
Owen,(31) former Chairman, Committee on Banking and Currency, United States
Robert L. Owen continues:
“It was not very long until this information was
brought to the Rothschild’s Bank, and they saw that here was a nation ready
to be exploited; here was a nation setting up an example that they could
issue their own money instead of the money coming through the Banks. The
Rothschild’s Bank caused a bill to be introduced in the English Parliament,
therefore, which provided that no colony of England could issue its own
money. They had to use English money. Consequently the colonies were
compelled to discard their ’scrip’ and mortgage themselves to the Bank of
England (the Amsterdam Bullion Brokers!) to get money. For the first time in
the history of the United States our money began to be based on debt.”
“Benjamin Franklin stated that in one year from that date the streets of the
colonies were filled with the unemployed, because when England exchanged
with them, she gave them only half as many units in payment in borrowed
the Rothschild as they had in ’scrip’. In other words, their
circulating medium was reduced 50%, and everyone became unemployed according
to Benjamin Franklin’s own statement.”
Continuing the quote from Senate Document No. 23:
“Mr. Franklin went
further than that. He said that this was the original cause of the
revolutionary war. In his own language: ‘The colonies would gladly have
borne the little tax on tea and other matters had it not been that England
took away from the colonies their money which created unemployment and
The French Revolution, so called, left much less evidence of its origins
than the so-called Russian Revolution 120 years later, though the
instigating factor is clear enough. The French Revolution by Nesta Webster,
The Life of Napoleon by Sir Walter Scott, almost unobtainable, and above all
the chapters in God and the Goldsmiths by McNair Wilson, on Napoleon
Bonaparte, give some light on this matter.
A study of Louis XV and his
relations to the Pâris Brothers, the state tax farmers, especially through
Madame Du Pompadour, formerly Poisson, possibly illegitimate child of Pâris
Duverney and god-daughter of Pâris Monmartel, yields impressions.
The writings of Necker, front man for the
international bankers of the time, and who Mirabeau described as “the Hero
who arrived by famine” should be read, and also the writings of Turgot,
finance Minister to Louis XVI, who fought against Necker and the evil
fraternity behind him, and who nicely summed up the situation in his first
memorandum to Louis XVI as follows:
“So long as finance shall be continually subject to the old expedients in
order to provide for state services, your Majesty will always be dependent
on financiers, and they ever will be the masters, and by the maneuvers
belonging to their trade they will frustrate the most important operations.
Thus the government can never feel itself at ease, it can never be
acknowledged as able to sustain itself, because the discontents and
impatience of the people are always the means made use of by intriguing and
ill-disposed men in order to excite disturbance.” (33)
Clearly the Minister Turgot was a man of sincerity and integrity, a true
God-servant, and the fact that it was only after prolonged scheming on the
part of the international bankers, who mostly lived outside of France, that
he was dismissed,(34) would suggest that his master also sought to do that
which he was borne to do, that is, love, guide, and protect the people...
But neither master nor man understood the strength of the undercurrents
which flowed, nor, it is to be feared, the true meaning of l’etat c’est moi!...
which in essence means,
“I am the fount of Life. I am that point through
which the Almighty God injects your money amongst you that binds you
together as one. I, and no other; not my steward, nor servant, faithful or
The men of intrigue he referred to, were such stewards, the international
bankers. These men, standing behind thrones intercepted that God-Power from
on high which was the force behind l’etat c’est moi!, and, controlling the
value of money of whatever kind, and therefore international price levels,
with responsibility only to them and theirs, confused the nations with their
sly schemes of fatuous purpose.
The instigating factor of the Russian Revolution so-called is common
knowledge and is detailed in a hundred books. Perhaps one of the best
sources of information relating to the financing of the same Russian
“Revolution” is the book Czarism and Revolution written by Arsene De
Goulévitch, a former officer of the Czar’s army and founder of the Union for
the Defense of Oppressed Peoples.
According to information deriving from the French Secret Service, one of the
principal sources of finances for the International Revolutionary Movement
prior to 1917, was Jacob Schiff of the International banking firm of Kuhn,
Loeb, and Company, based in New York City. It was recorded that twelve
million dollars had been donated to the revolutionaries by Schiff, in the
years preceding the war of 1914-1918. This fact is apparently confirmed and
amplified from sources other than the French Secret Service.(35)
The main funds for the so called “Revolution” and towards the steps which
led up to it, do not appear to have come from that class of nouveau riche
bred into being in Russia out of the activities over the previous 50 years,
of the joint stock banks, and the men such as Sawa Morozov, and Tereschenko,(36)
the socialistic sugar magnate.
The extensive funds so necessary towards the
effective disruption of a major state appear to have come from certain
British and American circles, which it seems, had been lending their support
to the Russian revolutionary “cause”, for a long time. In his book, My Life,
Trotsky speaks of a large loan granted in 1907 by a “Financier” belonging to
the so-called “Liberal” Party in Britain. This particular “British”
financier was apparently not alone in his monetary support of the
“Revolution” in Russia.(37)
The conduct of Jacob Schiff, previously mentioned, towards Czarist Russia,
once he was installed as head of the New York “International Banking” firm
of Kuhn, Loeb, and Company, was that of an apparently unyielding enemy.
References to his anti-czarist activities exist in the book by Cyrus Adler:
Jacob Schiff, his Life and Letters.(38)
Further verification of the activities of Jacob Schiff is afforded by the
New York “Journal American” of February 3rd, 1949; a time when
pro-revolutionary activities were “The Thing” in New York City:(39)
it is estimated by Jacob’s grandson, John Schiff, that the old man sank
about $20,000,000.00 for the triumph of Bolshevism in Russia.” (40)
According to Goulévitch (P. 231), various other persons well known in the
world of international banking, whatever the expression “International
Banking” might mean,(41) were also known to be associated with support of
The ruin to the states of the world set on foot by
these immensely rich, but otherwise trifling persons, whose solidarity,
however, had enabled them to so profit from the unbelievable expansion of
the use of Ledger Credit Page Entry Money in the Anglo-Saxon banking
systems, could not better demonstrate the absurdity of allowing private, and
therefore irresponsible, persons to exercise that power which should belong
to the gods alone, the power inherent in the creation and issuance of the
Unit of Exchange amongst the peoples.
In a speech made six weeks before the fall of the Kerensky Government, Lenin
made one of his most significant recommendations and perhaps the one most
suggestive of the possibility of his sincerity, even if in the rest he seems
to have been misguided.
It was the one recommendation most indicative of his
awareness of the deep-seated causes of the conditions that had given rise to
himself and what he stood for... Additional to proposing nationalization of
the great monopolies already existing in Russia, (primarily as the result of
the admission of joint-stock banking into the country as concession to the
victors of the Crimean war), above all he recommended the total
nationalization of banking.
In his own words he says:
...“all banks to be
merged into one and the state control its operations, that is the
nationalization of the banks.”
...“To talk about regularization of banks,” continues Lenin, "means either
to betray complete ignorance, or to fool the simple folk with high sounding
words... to control the delivery of bread, or in general, the production and
distribution of goods, without controlling banking practices, is an
(Collected Works , vol. 25, p. 329) (42)
Of course, six weeks later, when Lenin had physically seized power with the
aid of his “armed bandits”, it was a small matter to set up printing presses
in the major cities in Russia that commenced to pour off paper rubles by
the billion. Some fourteen or fifteen thousand workers were busily engaged
in the government printing shops of Moscow, Leningrad, Penza, Perm, and
Rostov-on-Don, turning out tons upon tons of paper money.
The printing of
notes was simplified to a point where counterfeiting became easy...(43)
At the same time safety deposit boxes were seized, all accounts frozen and
the banks were closed, so that there was no addition to the circulation
existing outside of banks at the start of this “operation,” a great part of
which circulation would have been gold; and no new money came on the scene
other than the paper rubles of the Bolshevik printing presses which
immediately took the place of that Ledger Credit Page Money by manipulation
of which the banks had previously controlled a great deal of trade.
For a year or two the Monarchist rubles were printed as if there was
intention to keep the people half expecting that the Czar would be coming
back, then for a short while a ‘Kerenki’ ruble was printed, presumably
issue of the short lived Kerensky government, as if to prepare the people
for total resignation, and then finally, the Bolshevik ruble which let the
people know that all was indeed lost.
This continuing the money of a
destroyed king seems to have been no new policy of international money
power, especially in the case of those kings, its particular enemies. An
illustration of which, occurring in ancient times, was the continued minting
at the Sardis mint of the sigloi of Croesus long after he had been
The printing press money of the Russian Revolution entered the
circulation against government expenditures and against gold coin which it
became illegal to possess, no doubt being accompanied by an equal amount of
counterfeit, also exchanged against gold.
These vigorous moves must have been cause for some misgivings amongst the
bankers who continued to finance the “Revolution” so far as went Bolshevik
needs in foreign exchange. But no doubt so closely surrounded was Lenin by
their agents,(44) they would have been justified in reasoning that they
would come out on top again without too much trouble, especially with the
new rubles being so easy to counterfeit. And during that period of the
so-called “New Economic Policy”, approximately 1920-24, they did so come out
In the archives of the State Publishers of Moscow is recorded the following
eulogy to the printing press as being as great a force in the so-called
revolution as armies:
“Paper money of the Soviet Republic gave support to the young regime at the
most critical period of its existence when there was no possibility of
raising direct taxes to meet the outlays of the civil war.
Hail to our
printing press ! It is true that its days are numbered but it has already
completed three quarters of its work. In the archives of the proletarian
revolution along with the cannon, rifles, and machine guns of our epoch that
vanquished the enemies of the proletariat, the place of honor will be given
to the printing press, the machine gun of the commissariat of finance that
poured fire into the rear of the bourgeois system and that made use of the
laws of currency and circulation of that regime for the purpose of
destroying it, and of financing the revolution.” (45)
Typically enough the “Tyrant” himself, Vladimir I. Lenin, saw little or no
profit out of all this, for himself, the Russian people, or that ideal of
world revolution in which it appears he sincerely believed. If he truly was
the author of the above statements regarding banking, then, when he died not
so long after all these events, it was as a weary and disillusioned man.
that gold, still very much the base for total control of world finance,
which was wrung from the Russian people during the period of terror between
1917 and 1922, seems to have almost all found its way back to the
“Benefactors” of the original revolutionaries, Messrs. Kuhn, Loeb, and
Company of New York (Jacob Schiff’s firm), and it must have been clear to
Lenin by the time he died in 1924 that he was but agent of a force that
regarded him as merely another tool to be used towards the making of that
which they designed.
“Mr. Bakhmetiev, the late Russian Imperial Ambassador to the United States,
tells us that the Bolsheviks, after victory, transferred 600 million roubles
in gold between the years 1918 and 1922, to Kuhn, Loeb, and Company
(Schiff’s firm)” (46)... which makes pretty good return for the mere
20,000,000 dollars granted by the philanthropic Mr. Schiff and which would
have been as credits against purchases at that!
At that time such amount of gold could be used to form the apex of an
inverted pyramid of abstract money equal in amount to beyond thirty times
the number of units such gold represented in U.S. currency according to its
1. Fritz Heichelheim: An Ancient Economic History, Vol. 1, P. 290; Leyden.
2. Houghton Mifflin (Publishers): Encyclopedia of World History, P. 48;
3. A. Andreades: History of the Bank of England, P. 22; London; 1966.
4. Sir William Ashley: Economic Organizations of England, P. 96-118. London; 1933.
5. Fritz Heichelheim: An Ancient Economic History, Vol. I, P. 290.
6. A. Del Mar: History of the Precious Metals, P. 81; New York, 1968.
7. A. Del Mar: Money and Civilization. Also John R. Elsom. pp. 49-50.
8. Commander Guy Carr: Pawns in the Game, pp. 19, 20, 21.
9. G. Ravenscroft Dennis: The House of Cecil, P. 61. London, 1914.
10. Illustrated London News, Nov. 11th, 1911, P. 762.
11. Lucien Wolf: The Resettlement of the Jews in England; London; 1888.
12. A. Andreades: History of the Bank of England, P. 28.
13. F.P.G. Guizot: Histoire de la République d'angleterre, pp. 154-155;
14. Max Dimont: Jews, God, and History, P. 291. New York; 1962.
15. According to the letters of Quang Chang Ling (1878); (History of the
Precious Metals; P. 348; A. Del Mar):
“ It was in the year 1498 that the
Portuguese made their way around the Cape (of Good Hope). In 1510, under
Albuquerque, they treacherously seized the East Indian city of Goa, and
leaving a garrison in it, sailed away to Malacca which they had seen and
coveted in 1508... They plundered Malacca of a booty so enormous that the Quinto, or fifth, of the king of Portugal amounted to 200.000 gold cruzados,
a sum equivalent to $5,000,000.00...”
“ We have our own theory concerning the sources of your present riches. We
ascribe it in part, to your gains from the piratical conquest, enslavement
and murderous extinction of the American races, but chiefly to the
profitable trade with the Orient. From the opening of this trade to 1640,
when the Portuguese were driven from Japan, and the British first acquired
territory in Hindustan, three of your European nations alone took a thousand
million dollars in gold and silver from Asia; two thirds as much as they
wrung from all America during the same period. From Malacca alone they took
25.000.000; from Japan, up to the date mentioned, four hundred millions;
from India and China still greater sums (in gold or silver coin, or bullion)...”
16. The Chapters in Del Mar’s History of Civilization dealing with this
period, will repay the reading.
17. Andreades: History of the Bank of England, pp. 14-32.
18. Andreades: History of the Bank of England, P. 19-20.
19. Ibid. P. 22.
20. A. del Mar: History of Monetary Crimes, PP. 7-44.
21. Pepys Diary, Aug 17th, 1666. Diary and Correspondence. 5 vols. London,
22. Anderson, Adam, P. 485, An Historical and Chronological Deduction of the
Origin of Commerce, Vol. II, London, 1787-1789.
23. Charles II was totally in the hands of the bankers and goldsmiths as is
revealed by the following extract from D. MacPherson’s Annals of Commerce,
“Charles being in want of money, the bankers took 10% of him
barefacedly, and by private contracts on many bills, orders, tallies and
debts of that King, they got 20, sometimes 30% to the great dishonor of
Government. This great gain induced the Goldsmiths to become more and more
lenders to the King, to anticipate all the revenues, to take every grant of
Parliament into pawn as soon as it was given; also to outvie each other in
buying and taking to pawn bills, orders and tallies, so that in effect, all
the revenue passed through their hands.”
24. Will Durant: The Reformation; P. 459.
25. Commander Guy Carr: Pawns in the Game, P. 20.
26. According to A. Andreades (History of the Bank of England. P. 30.),
Frederick Harrison says in his biography of Oliver Cromwell:
the efforts of the Protector to impress his own spirit of toleration on the
intolerance of his age... He effectively protected the Quakers; he
admitted the Jews after an expulsion of three centuries, and he satisfied
Mazarin that he had given to Catholics all the protection that he dared...”
27. Commander Guy Carr: Pawns in the Game, P. 19-21.
28. A. Andreades: History of the Bank of England, P. 28.
31. Robert L. Owen was the senator who wrote and introduced the legislation
setting up the Federal Reserve (Central Banking) system in 1913. His
foreword to a book written by a Miss Gertrude Coogan shows that he lived to
bitterly regret his part in writing and introducing this Bill. The remark
made later by President Wilson, who had paved the way for the Bill — “ I am
a most unhappy man. Unwittingly I have ruined my country ” — shows that Owen
was not alone in his remorse...
The Central Banking System known as the
Federal Reserve System and towards the creation of which he had been the
principal instrument, though apparently state department in the same way as
the Bank of England, was in reality no more than the instrument through
which the so-called International Bankers harnessed the burgeoning energies
of the American peoples to themselves, their own world wide needs and
purposes. From first to last, which perhaps has not yet come, it was a
privately owned and controlled institution.
32. John R. Elsom: Lightning over the Treasury Building, PP. 29-30; Forum
33. R. McNair Wilson: God and the Goldsmiths, P. 48.
34. His dismissal was effected through the agency of Marie-Antoinette. As
she disliked Turgot personally, no doubt she was a ready instrument.
35. A. Goulévitch: Czarism and Revolution, P. 225.
36. Ibid. P. 223.
37. Ibid., P. 224.
38. Cyrus Adler: Jacob Schiff, His Life and Letters, New York, 1928.
39. Although it is really very difficult to see what exactly would have been
left for this class of people, often multi-millionaires, to revolt against
by 1949, which also includes the hegemony of the Anglo-Saxon in the United
40. Also according to the author of Czarism and Revolution (P. 224),... “
in the Spring of 1917, Jacob Schiff openly boasted of having been
instrumental in overthrowing the Czarist regime...”
41. According to Dr. Carroll Quigley (P. 52.) in the review by W. Cleon
Skousen outstanding characteristics of the international bankers were:
“...they remained different from ordinary bankers in distinctive ways:
they were cosmopolitan and international
(2) they were close to
governments and were particularly concerned with questions of government
(3) their interests were almost exclusively in bonds and very
rarely in goods...
(4) they were accordingly fanatical devotees of
(5) they were almost equally devoted to secrecy and the secret
use of financial influence in political life
These bankers came to be
called ‘international bankers’ and, more particularly, were known as
‘merchant’ bankers in England, ‘private bankers’ in France, and ‘investment
bankers’ in the United States. In all countries they carried on various
kinds of banking and exchange activities, but everywhere they were sharply
distinguishable from other, more obvious kinds of banks, such as savings
banks or commercial banks.”
42. Arthur Zapolsky Arnold, Ph.D.: Banks, Credit, and Money in Soviet
Russia, P. 57; Columbia; 1937. Also see the article by Lenin in “Pravda,”
May 29th-30th, 1917: The threatening catastrophe and boundless promises.
Of equal interest and strikingly similar in the language used is the comment
of Lionel Rothschild on the subject of banking as quoted by Lord
Beaconsfield (Benjamin D’israeli) in 1844: “can anything be more absurd
than that a nation should apply to an individual to maintain its credit, and
with its credit, its existence as a state and its comfort as a people;... ?”
43. Arthur Zapolsky Arnold: Banks, Credit, and Money in Soviet Russia, P.
96; Columbia; 1937.
44. Fr. Dennis Fahey: Mystical Body of Christ in the Modern World, Dublin;
45. (a) Arthur Zapolsky Arnold: Banks, Credit, and Money in Soviet Russia,
pp. 96-97. (b) Paper Money during the epoch of the Dictatorship of the
Proletariat, (Moscow State Publishers, 1920) P. 4.
46. A. Goulévitch: Czarism and Revolution, P. 225.
Back to Contents
POTSHERDS AND OTHER FRAGMENTS
The glimpse at these cataclysmic events of relatively modern times, as in
the previous chapter, will assist towards understanding of the implications
of similar events in ancient times of which but the most fragmentary
As was written three thousand years ago:
"Is there anything whereof it may be said; See this is new ?
it hath been already of old time which was before us." (1)
So returning to that smaller world of ancient days, the theme of this book,
it may safely be said that similar conspiracy and secret manoeuvre led up to
all that fast changing sequence of social events that clearly followed a
definite design, in Attica; particularly from the collapse of hereditary
kingship in 683 B.C.; which date marks, it most reasonably may be assumed,
the commencement of rule by Money Creative Power either international or
home grown... A king created annually by vote has even less chance of ruling
effectively than the so-called presidents of today, elective kings as they
really are, though sorry enough spectacles some of them may be, and who have
as much as five years to serve the purposes of whoever they front for...
Some writers dismiss the idea of a capitalism in antiquity, but accepting
definition of capitalism as the condition of the unrestricted promotion of
human activity through the instrument of the driving force of that power of
creation, and loan against collateral, and at interest, of the unit of
exchange, or of promises of the unit of exchange as denoted by Ledger Credit
Page Entry, and which function as the same thing in exchanges between
persons dealing with the same banker or interlocked system of banks, very
little analysis of the circumstances that gave rise to the tyrants will show
that a form of "capitalism" did exist, even if more local in character, and
restricted to the individual city, or state, as a rule.
The tyrant was front
man towards the total monetization of the state, the land and its labor,
and towards the transfer of that independent labor formerly firmly placed
in the Natural Order of God-Life, to a condition of dependence on a wage of
money, directed towards being able to keep on living as with the notion of
being a free man.
Today we but repeat the mistakes of the past; however today it is not merely
disaster to a small city or state and its way of life, but with the existing
refinement of that which can only be described as the money swindle as it
was conducted in ancient times by the trapezitae at their bench in the
market place, made possible by mass paper manufacture and the printing
press, and the enormous potentialities therein towards quickening the speed
and drive of human life and endeavor, it almost certainly will prove to be,
one way or another, total disaster, and to all mankind...
Those lines of Solon say enough:
But of themselves in their folly the men of the city are willing
Our great city to wreck, being won over by wealth.
False are the hearts of the people's leaders.(2)
A further couplet indicates the meaning of "our great city to wreck".
Great men ruin a city: for lack of understanding
Under a despot's yoke lieth the people enslaved.(3)
These lines written after the seizure by Peisistratus of the Tyranny at
Athens would indicate that the same Peisistratus had the assistance in his
rise to power of those former great landowning families of Attica who had
been drawn into the schemes of the foreign money masters to their undoing...
These landowners had forgotten their duty towards their own people.
Fascinated by strange luxuries and the stranger talk of the money men, the trapezitae, they had permitted themselves to be absorbed with visions of
that new wealth measured by the numbers indicated by the precious metal
symbols of these same trapezitae... They forgot that in the absolute
analysis they themselves were but stewards of a higher power. Lacking
understanding, above all, of the true nature of this money as being above
all their own law towards the facilitation of the exchanges amongst
themselves and their people, they had been lead astray from their duty.
conniving with the bankers and their protégées the new manufacturers, to
drive their own people off the land into the cities, and into the industries
rapidly speeding up from the new money economy, they forgot that in their
capacity as rulers, the whole land was theirs in trust to their people, and
that the people therefore were expectant of them to be their guides and
These plausible aliens who set up the money economy via their so-called
"banks", owned nothing but unmitigated gall, a vast contempt for mankind,
and such as they could double-talk the naïve peasant rulers into giving
The folly of these rulers in equating possession with the master moneyers
trifling pieces of gold and silver dated back to those grim Kings of the
Homeric Sagas or before, who, being lain in their graves at Mycenae with all
their riches, thus set off on their eternal journey with that small store of
gold that the crafty Babylonian money-men had trained them to regard as
wealth, as opposed to the real wealth of an organized state whose money was
the benevolent law of the ruler in relation to surpluses, and directed
towards the good and continuing life of the people and no more...
Those who had power and made men to marvel at their riches.(4)
This line indicates that Solon, like so many equally worthy people of this
day, knew that money was an evil without understanding what it was about
money that made it so... Not the having of the precious metal pieces of the
banker recording the number of units represented, for such metal money lying
inert beneath the floors (5) has no meaning so far as the quickening or
slowing of the pulse of life is concerned...
It has no more meaning than
have abstract units of exchange media that have not yet been recorded in the
ledger on account of no suitable (to the banker!) demand for them... and, of
course, they are without limit... Nor even the spending of it as the holder,
according to law, might choose...
The evil is in the forgetfulness of the
ruler that money is no more than a recording of his law of exchange, its
magnitude being governed by the number of units indicated... It can never be
treasure which is merely items carrying with them a high valuation in
relation to such units, relative to their desirability and portability...
The evil about money derives in consequence from lack of understanding of
its true nature, and particularly from the confusing of money and treasure.
It is the persistent failure of mankind to realize that money is but the
result of agreement being arrived at amongst a sovereign people through
their ruler, to provide themselves with a system of numbers by which their
exchanges might be facilitated, and so help them to live a better life...
Treasure being but commodity by which the unit of value of whatever state
may be, can best be stored; even though such state cease to exist; because
of that ancient and international convention in respect to the valuation of
such treasure such as has lasted from age to age; from the most ancient
times, Palaeolithic or earlier, until today...
The evil lay and it may be said, lies, in the forgetfulness of the ruler to
respect his duty to provide an adequate money supply for his people
regulated by himself and free of obligation to external forces, in such
manner as had existed in the Ancient Oriental civilizations in earlier
times... It lay in the permitting to private and hence irresponsible persons
the power to intervene in that which was the most sacred responsibility of
the ruler through the priesthood, the creation and regulation of the medium
of exchange: his people's money.
Therefore the hidden force behind the setting up of a tyranny was the far
reaching power of a conspiratorial secret society, international in scope,
controlling money emission in all countries which it penetrated through its
continuing control of the sources of supply of that silver treasure by
weight such as constituted the base of the exchange systems long ago
established by itself.
The tyrant, therefore, was clearly the front man for the local banker more
than actually being the banker himself... He it was who gave legality to the
banker and the activities of that coterie of merchants, traders, and
captains who flourished on the banker's financial organization, and, though
this they did not understand, his connection with those international
bullion brokers of the day.
These worthy businessmen depended for tiding
themselves over difficult periods on that which the banker loaned them as
money: maybe an entry in a ledger transferable to the account of a fellow
merchant, visiting captain, or trader in slaves, or other merchandise; they
also depended on the banker to be safe custodian for such treasure as came
The tyrant was therefore, either naïve or corrupt, the
instrument set up by the banker, firstly towards the legalization of his
status, and secondly towards the removal of that class who might yet
challenge his peculiar and secret power, the natural aristocracy of Hellas.
This natural aristocracy, in a growing system that clearly sought the
alienation and subversion of its free dependents with the purpose of
ultimately leading them into paid day labor or into slavery final and
absolute, was uncertainly situated in states which now owed their existence
to the bankers, and their coterie of entrepreneurs, and manufacturers, and
merchants, as clearly did so many of the Greek states of the Greek
The banker, lurking in the shade apart from men, knew that these proud
noblemen, formerly lords of this lovely land which was Greece, had forgotten
the meaning of their own existence, and its relation to the total ordering
of their society, and he despised them as well he might, for permitting him
to undermine the true order of life and cause these simple folk, their
peasantry, to be driven off the land one way or another, to the wage slavery
of the potteries at Corinth, or Athens, or wherever it might be or whatever
it might be.
In the same way, the Lords of the Manors of England and Scotland had driven
the peasantry off the common lands some 2400 years later; land now
representing that magic of money of which previously they had seen little...
The same peasantry drifting into the new manufacturing and mining towns,
dazed and leaderless, then formed a plentiful labor supply for that similar
putrescent wickedness which was the industrial revolution in England's green
and pleasant land. If they were lucky they were able to emigrate.
In the lines of Theognis whose political aim was to prevent a recurrence of
the Tyranny in Megara which was a centre for the manufacture of textiles:
Tradesmen reign supreme: the bad lord it over their betters.
This is the lesson that all must thoroughly master:
How that in the world wealth has the might and the power.
Many a bad man is rich and many a good man is needy.
Not without cause, Oh Wealth, do men honor thee above all things.
Must men reckon the only virtue the making of money ?
Everyone honors those that are rich and despises the needy.(6)
The banker, trained from the money shops of Babylonia, knew that for him the
only desirable political situation was where the lowly and vulgar (7)
the appearance of power and wealth and "money", for such would not question
too intently the source from whence they derived that "money", nor the
nature of that "money" such as had paved their way to so-called power, for
fear its so necessary supply might be cut off.
In the words of Aristophanes:
Often has it crossed my fancy that the cities apt to deal
With the very best and noblest of the Commonweal
Just as with our ancient coinage, and the fine new minted gold
These, sir, our sterling pieces, all of pure Athenian mould,
All of perfect die and metal, all the fairest of the fair,
All of workmanship unequalled, proved and valued everywhere,
These we use not. But the worthless pinchbeck coins of yesterday,
Vilest die and basest metal, now we always use instead.
Even so our sterling townsmen, nobly born and nobly bred,
Men of worth and rank and mettle, men of
Trained in every liberal science, choral dance and manly game,
These we treat with scorn and insult. But the strangers newliest come,
Worthless sons of worthless fathers, pinchbeck townsmen, coppery scum
(Whom in earlier days the city hardly would have stooped to use
Even for her scapegoat victims) these for every task we choose.(8)
Where, as in a city such as Megara, one banking house might control all
credit or money creation, to question and seek to know how this was done
would also mean search for knowledge of the banker's secrets and this, our
tyrant instinctively knew, was dangerous for his continued success.
What are the gains that lead up to a tyranny? Is it not more probable that
they are some form of payment received by the commons (those that are bad)
from the would-be tyrant ?
Not at all... Merely the word was passed by that banking institution to
which the majority of tradesmen or manufacturers in that particular city
were indebted, that the banker, giver of all, (and taker of all!), favored
this move. Ah!... and indeed it would be good for all, and to please the
common people there would be plenty of work!... It may safely be considered
that the first legislation passed by our new tyrant would legalize the
position of his backers, which previously, as likely as not, had been
The tyrant at this stage of history, was a necessity to Money Power, and
while possibly having the appearance of being wealthy, he depended for his
real finances on that backer whose interests he promoted. Those two officers
of Alexander for example, who accepted the tyranny of Asiatic cities could
in no way have understood the reality of finance, international or
otherwise, except perhaps if they had been clerks in the paymaster corps of
officer status. If they had so understood such finance, it is doubtful that
they would have been promoted as they were...
The tyrant was one who the banker could rely on to put through his "Leveling"
program, or in the double talk of today, could be relied on to "Press
ahead with Democratization", and to work against the class from which he was
supposed to have come.(9)
He was one who could be relied on to put through programs of public works, maintain military expenditures etc.; for all
such activities strengthened the banker's position as creator and regulator
of the exchange unit, and therefore, from those exclusive courtyards wherein
he schemed, designer of the life of the city. The banker could not maintain
his hold over the city, except his product, ledger credit page entry money,
however created, was in constant demand, and the local government deeply
embroiled in his schemes.
The tyrant had to be one completely in accord with
that so-called "democratic" political attitude, which the banker always
seemed to espouse... His ostensible purpose had to be to "Level"; such
leveling meaning of course, tearing down everything above themselves, (and
above the banker too!...)
Those fragments of verse as quoted here, reputed to be by Solon, leave
little doubt of the sincerity of Solon, at least superficially. The fact
remains that as a merchant, whether of necessity or otherwise, he must have
been marked with some of the outlook of that class.
His famous laws, amongst
which was that law releasing the peasantry from the debt slavery into which
their natural rulers had permitted them to be drawn, and that was eating
into the very vitals of Attica, in view of the fact that he offered
citizenship to any family moving to Athens with the intention of taking up
some manual trade, might very well have been promoted by his backers.
city was clearly very short of suitable free labor. It very well might be
that his backers were those money lenders and bankers that controlled the
growing manufacturies of Athens, and who saw that there was more profit and
work for that which they loaned as money, in bringing the peasantry to
Athens as free men (if a wage slave is really any more free than a slave
owned outright!) (10) and in having thus a plentiful supply of
in tying such peasantry to the soil by debt slavery, and in the case of
distraint, their sale on to a surfeited market abroad.
While there was still
a healthy population of small holders as well as the great landlords, there
was always possibility of recovery by the enslaved state, and themselves,
the enslavers, as happened at Sparta in the time of Lycurgus, driven out of
the land for hundreds of years... With a massive proletariat beholden to the
men of the city for their freedom (as day laborers!), the former
aristocracy even if they should ever awaken to their duty, would have no
chance... Nor did they.
All those "liberalizing" laws promulgated by Solon
and his successors, steadily deprived the ancient families of Attica of
their former power and prerogative. The shadow of power was put into the
hands of ignoble persons, as indeed would have been so many of the
"Demagogues", and other "Democratic" officials, who, too often would have
been no more than blind creatures lifted up from the mob to the service of
By the devices existing as part of what is known as
"democracy", such as Ostrakism through rumor put into circulation by the
secret societies in the city, controlled, as in today, by the bankers
without a doubt, "Leaders" no longer "suitable" could be removed.
"The tyrants themselves are repeatedly found making it part of their policy
to keep their subjects employed on big industrial concerns. In more than one
case we shall see their power collapsing just when this policy becomes
financially impossible." (11)
In other words if that tyrant proved unsatisfactory to his masters, money
that source of strength in political life, was cut off just at the time it
would be most needed, such as when he had become involved in heavy spending.
Herein is further proof of the tyrant being not money power itself, but
front man for money power...
"...This part of the tyrant's policy is noticed by Aristotle who quotes the
dedications (buildings and works of art) of the Cypselids at Corinth, the
buildings of Olymphian Zeus at Athens by the Peisistratids, and the works of
Polycrates around Samos. To these names we add Theagenes of Megara, Phalaris
of Agrigentum, Aristodemus of Cumae and the Tarquins of Rome, all of whom
are associated with works of this kind." (12)
It is pointed out by Professor Ure that it can scarcely be an accident that
the Tyranny of Athens ended almost immediately after the removal of one of
its two roots; the mines of the country of the Thracians and
Paionians (13)... Which is to say that if the source of bullion on which the
money power of a so-called banker was founded, petered out, or was lost to
enemy action, the tyrant he had promoted could be discarded as having no
Such activities being ordered by a class of persons who had achieved
despotic power in the same period of history, roughly the eighth, seventh,
and sixth centuries B.C., the period which saw extensive development of
mining in all of Europe including Lydia, Cyprus, Spain,(14) Carpathia,
Epirus, Illyria, Thrace and Greece itself, without mentioning the flow of
precious metal plunder deriving from the depredations of the Assyrian, can
only have been the result of a policy deep laid, and far reaching in its
This policy can only have been created in some central point
from which flowed the springs of world power such as would have designed,
wittingly, or unwittingly, so much of the ancient world.
The same period also coincided with the development of mining tools of
hardened iron, highly efficient methods of reduction of silver bearing
ores,(15) and the growth of an adequate supply of slave labor from various
sources and due to the above mentioned depredations of the Assyrian etc.;
all of which was so necessary towards profitable mining operations at that
time. It may not unreasonably be supposed that this central point was still
in the cities of lower Mesopotamia, such as Babylon, Ur, Lagash,
From this area the merchant houses would have continued to have spread their
operations around the world (16) in the same way, as, it is recorded, had
been done from Ur as much as fifteen hundred years before during the
so-called IIIrd Dynasty;(17) or for that matter during the period of seeming
glory and empire that so often follows the accession to power of private
money creative force in any organized and potentially vigorous state.
outstanding instance of the latter in modern times exists in the period of
empire that came to Britain following the establishment of the Bank of
England in 1694 A.D.(18)
The silver which the international bankers drew from Greece etc. at a ratio
of 10:1 or more, would have been used in settlement of trade balances with
India, Bactria, or China, at a ratio of 6:1 or less, as to gold. According
to Alexander del Mar, this movement of silver to the Orient from Athens, was
arranged by the Athenian Government;(19) but except this early Athenian
Government was fronting for the bankers, this could not have been so.
International trade balances have always been settled from the world's
banking capital or headquarters of the international bankers or bullion
brokers, such as was London during the last three centuries until very
recently. In the days of which we write, this world banking capital was
still located in Babylon city, it may reasonably be assumed.
The money of the cities of lower Mesopotamia and the whole Near East for
that matter, had been based for a long time on the international valuation
of silver by weight, and therefore these cities had long ago sought to
obtain control of all sources of supply of such silver. As far back as 2470
B.C., King Manishtusu of Akkad invaded Southern Persia with no purpose other
than gaining control of its silver mines.(20)
When the rapid expansion of
mining, as mentioned above, brought on to the markets of the world a
relative deluge of silver and gold, the latter taking no mean second place,
those groups controlling International finance from Babylonia, and possibly
from Nineveh, decided no doubt to seek for further worlds to conquer, as it
The thing was to find a use for their surfeit of bullion, particularly
silver, and of which metal they were now in a position to arrange extensive
supplies to any banker who would be able to use such advantageously towards
the promotion of their general worldwide plans. The growing commercial and
industrial vigor of the Greeks showed them an answer to this problem...
Thus the significance of the advent of the tyrants as promoters of heavy
public spending of moneys based originally, on the silver standards of
Babylonia, cannot be dismissed...
The policy of the bankers, for whom the tyrants fronted, would be to spread
the main practice, at least their most profitable one, of private money
creation, one way or the other. Using silver as base, they knew full well
the tremendous possibilities that existed towards the creation of an
abstract money whose equally efficient units cost them no more than entry by
the slave scribe on the clay tablet that sufficed as his ledger.
spread, together with competition in manufacture, the need for that which
the international bankers of that day, faceless as in this day, loaned
against collateral as money. This money was based on the silver bullion they
let it be known they were possessed of or held on deposit for their
customers, be they individual, corporate body, or state.
It is reasonable to assume that there was little difference as between that
first tangible money of private issuance in England as denoted by the
goldsmiths receipts of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries (21) and the
money as issued by the banks of the Greek cities. Its efficacy in the
exchanges, although it was in reality no more than a highly organized system
of counterfeit, derived from the total secrecy maintained by those involved
in its issue.
Little clear information exists on this subject today as in
ancient times and much of which, even if all the millions of tablets
unearthed in Mesopotamia are ever translated and evaluated by scholars
competent to do so, must remain as but faint outline...
One such faint outline of particular interest, though not deriving from the
Mesopotamian tablets, is discernible in this information of Servius Tullius,
slave king of early Rome:
"According to Charisius, Varro wrote:
Nummum argenteum flatum primum a
Servio Tullio dicunt, is IIII scripulis major fuit quam nunc." "It is said
that silver money was first made by Servius Tullius and was IIII scripulis
heavier than now." (22)
As it was Servius Tullius who ordered the establishment of the census at
Rome that gave the basis for both taxation and military service, both
essential organizations as to a state being taken over by international
money power, the truth of this statement by Varro need not be questioned.
It is interesting to note in passing that although Servius Tullius was a
usurper undoubtedly of slave origin, Livy carefully draws him in rather more
favorable light than the Tarquins, particularly Superbus, the last of the
line... By the time of Livy (59 B.C.-17 A.D.) the most powerful sector of
the Roman population, the equites or knights, was taken over by wealthy
freedmen and enfranchised foreigners (23)... Livy, when writing in that day
under the threat of Lex Majestus (24) would clearly have seen the value of
finding and extolling true virtue in the character of the slave king,
whether such virtue was there or not...
...However, if Servius actually did exist, and there seems to be a school of
thought amongst the scholars that questions his existence, then it would be
more likely as one who had raised himself up in a similar manner to Gyges of
Lydia,(25) having at the same time a special backing by local money power;
possibly in opposition to that money power emigrant from Corinth to
Tarquinii in Etruria, which, according to Livy, was the Tarquin family.
The establishment of a silver standard as a base for monetary issuance might
very well have been their reward for their assistance towards raising
Servius to the throne.
The Census, supposedly established by Servius, while
being the foundation of the organization of the whole state for defense or
aggression, would give that money power a complete picture of the people it
was their intention, one way or another, to exploit.
In the same manner the
doomsday books of the Middle Ages, while recording for the reference of the
king, all that in the kingdom was, also made valuable record for the money
creative power, which had kings, nobles, ecclesiastics, and the common
people, groaning under a burden of debt quite impossible to meet (which
certainly was one of the main causes of the mood of the English that gave
rise to Magna Carta, and of those events which followed until 1290 A.D. when
the tax-collecting and money-lending classes, such as had followed the
"Conqueror" across the English Channel, were finally evicted).(26)
In a similar manner some 2500 years later, William III of England, owing his
throne to the intrigues of the international bullion brokers at Amsterdam,
granted them as reward that which they wanted more than anything on earth,
which was the establishment of the legality of an undeterminable amount of
abstract money, ledger credit page entry, or paper notes, to be based on
their gold loans to the state, and the creation of a "Bank" at London from
which they might issue this money known as "Credit" as loan against real
collateral throughout the whole kingdom.
This bank was to be given the
appearance of a state department. In this case such status was obtained by
permitting it to be named:
"The Bank of England." (27)
Considering the above known instance of reward to international money powers
for their services, far reaching in its consequences, and many other
instances of which there is neither time nor place to write herewith,
conjecture in respect to the establishment of a silver standard at Rome by
Servius, may not be too far afield.
That Romans later rejected this standard
as a base for their money, and the calamity and loss of sovereignty it
brought them also is clear, for there is no further reference to silver
money until that period when Rome was drifting towards the all-out struggle
with Carthage: the year of the establishment of the board of Moneyers for
the striking of bronze, silver and gold money (289 B.C.): tresviri aere
argento auro flando feriurado;(28) thereby no doubt yielding to the
importunities of the International Bullion brokers, with the ensuing
outbreak of war thus being made a certainty.
One of the main purposes of those extensive public works which almost
invariably followed the establishment of a tyranny, would be towards the
establishment of some kind of National Debt, in which is, and was in that
day too, most control and profit to those manipulating international
finance. That there is no evidence of the existence of such state
indebtedness in those days does not necessarily mean that such did not
Excavation, or other methods, 2500 years from now would not reveal
this indebtedness for instance in the case of England, so far as its
relation to the Bank of England was concerned, for, unbelievable though it
may seem, there is "remarkable absence of official records" for the first
hundred years of the bank's existence! (29)
In the time of the tyrants,
failure to keep books or records would be even more of a certainty.
Valuable by-products of their extensive public works programs would be:
The peasants would leave the land enticed by the money wages offered for
work on these projects, and the pleasures and excitement that could be
bought in the city with such money wages. There, once the construction boom
was over, they formed a leaderless, hungry, and easily embittered
The same "Proletariat" could be manipulated by the agents of Money Power
as a mob, towards such political purposes as such Money Power might desire;
including, besides removal of the natural nobility, removal of the so-called
tyrant when his purpose was served.
Professor Ure, author of The Origins of Tyranny, ventures as close to the
truth in respect to the meaning of a tyranny as any others who have written
on the subject...
Although attributing the rise of the tyrants to Money
Power he does not define what this Money Power may be; whether money
creative power, or just those of considerable possession and treasure. In
this omission he cannot be blamed.... Professor Ure for instance traces the
source of the power of Peisistratus, Tyrant of Athens 561-527 B.C. according
to Herodotus,(30) as being partly from those silver mines in the district in
Thrace through which flows the Strymon river, and partly from the Laurion
mines in Attica.
However, it must be pointed out that a man who apparently was a mining man
and lived therefore within that restriction, would be unlikely to understand
the finer shades of monetary emission. It seems quite reasonable to suppose
that the class of persons hidden within the Aramaic speaking middle classes
that permeated the whole Levant and Near East during the first Millennium
B.C., and whose business was money and all that stemmed therefrom, in that
they were interfering with that which clearly was a power to be exercised
only by the very gods themselves, were scarcely likely to instruct their
instrument, Peisistratus, therein...
Therefore, it may be concluded, the
tyrant rose because he was the one who had found favor with the
all-pervading money power of the day. He was not money power itself !
In that most of the great public works of the Greek cities had been carried
forward by the tyrants is the evidence; for as the secretive money power of
today, world-wide in scope, thrives primarily upon government loans directed
to purposes of war and the enormous spending that wars involve in order to
strengthen their outrageous claims against the nations, in ancient days
similar heavy spending had to be devised. In that day, as previously pointed
out, a great Acropolis or some other such magnificent public work with whose
construction and financial organization Money Power was fully conversant,
sufficed equally well with war; which, all said and done, with hardy
aggressive peoples could also prove considerable danger to themselves, or
So, with the tyrant, we see the force by which Greece, previously living in
natural order, was molded to an instrument more suitable to those bankers:
private money creative power, who, lurking in the shade as needs they had
to, burned with rancor at the natural rulers who but treated them as
stewards, although the essence of power for all that, lay in their hands for
more than such rulers understood...
Thus were the simple and industrious and brave Greeks now raised up to be
the new vehicle through which the final and destructive purposes of those
controlling international bullion and slave trades would be achieved, as
they shepherd the peoples of the world further down that road of no hope for
themselves or the rest of mankind...
1. Ecclesiastes. Chapter 1, Verse 10; King James Version.
2. P.N. Ure, M.A.: The Origins of Tyranny; New York; 1922.
4. P.N. Ure: The Origins of Tyranny, P. 8; New York; 1922.
5. It was the custom in ancient times to bury hoarded wealth (tangible)
beneath the floor of the house.
6. The Origins of Tyranny, P. 8, P.N. Ure, M.A., New York, 1922.
7. Hence the situation at Athens so similar to the situation in the
Anglo-Saxon world today. Athens at that stage of the Peloponnesian War was
undoubtedly completely under the political control of the banks (or
trapezitae). It was not long after the battle of Aegospotami, 405 B.C., in
which Lysander of Sparta destroyed the whole Athenian fleet as it lay drawn
up on the beach, that the war ended with the usual results of such "Great"
wars in so called "democratic" states, and with Athens completely dependent
on privately created money for its finances, that is, on the International
Bankers, and with such types of persons suitable to them and their plans for
the future, occupying key positions. The victor, Sparta, was equally
dependent on their good will, as a result of those concessions undoubtedly
made at the Treaty of Miletus, 412 B.C. in order to obtain money such as was
desirable internationally, and with which could be purchased the ships so
necessary to defeat Athens, and without which the war could not have been
brought to definite conclusion.
8. The Frogs of Aristophanes, lines 717 to 733, trans. by B.B. Rogers (with
slight variations). (Page 138, Greek Coins, Charles Seltsman, M.A., London,
9. In exactly the same way as Lenin, Dictator (or Tyrant) of Russia
1917-1922 was supposed to be drawn from the Nobility, or as Mao-Tse-Tung, at
a later date dictator in China, was supposed to have derived from a similar
class in China.
10. The following letter circularized amongst American Bankers by European
Banking interests during the American civil war gives a most revealing light
on this subject. There is no reason to suppose that the motives of the
trapezitae of the Greek city states were in any way more altruistic:
"Slavery is likely to be abolished by the war power and chattel slavery
destroyed. This, I and my European friends are in favor of, for slavery is
but the owning of labor and carries with it the care of the laborers,
while the European plan, led by England, is that capital shall control
labor by controlling wages..."
This letter, known as the Hazard Circular,
is to be found on Pages 44-45 in The Money Manipulators by June Grem.
11. Ure: The Origins of Tyranny, P. 15.
12. Ibid. P. 14.
13. Ibid. P. 59.
14. Ibid. P. 46.
15. A. Del Mar: A History of the Precious Metals, pp. 47-51.
16. Cambridge Ancient History, P. 392, Vol. I.
17. Sir Charles Woolley: Abraham, P. 121-126.
18. A. Andreades: History of the Bank of England. Also see Tragedy and Hope,
by Dr. Quigley.
19. A. del Mar: The Halcyon Age of Greece, P. 5.
There also were to be found outlying places in the Orient where the ratio of
gold to silver went as low as l:1 during the 1st Millennium B.C., remaining
so until a very late date, in certain instances. It is reported by Sir Henry
J. Reid, who wrote during the 19th Century, in his book Japan (Chapter
XVIII), that the ratio of silver to gold, governing the use of the precious
metals in settlement of trade balances, was still 1:1 in Japan during the
17th Century A.D.; long after contact with Europeans. The advantage the
European bullion brokers took of this situation with its resultant
disturbance to the status quo, was one of the main factors leading up to the
almost total expulsion of Europeans from Japan during the period 1624 A.D. -
20. Sir Charles Woolley: Abraham, P. 122.
21. A. Andreades: History of the Bank of England, pp. 22-26.
22. Theodore Mommsen & Joachim Marquardt: Manuel des Antiquités Romaines, P.
12, Tome IX; De l'Organisation Financière chez les Romaines, Paris, 1888.
23. Ibid. P. 68.
24. In its origins in 100 B.C., Lex Majestus (lex appuleia de maiestate
imminuta) was an extension of the definition of treason as being internal
revolt, to include any act impairing the "Majesty" of the Roman people. By
the time of the early Empire, this law had been extended to cover almost any
word or deed against the Emperor, and, it may reasonably be assumed, those
who guided his policies. Spies and informers were everywhere...
Of this period Tacitus wrote at the very beginning of the Annals:
been transmitted to us concerning Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius and Nero,
cannot be received without great distrust."
He further wrote in "The
"... But when the battle of Actium had been fought and the
interests of peace demanded the concentration of power in the hands of one
man, this great line of classical historians came to an end. Truth suffered
in more ways than one. To an understandable ignorance of policy, which now
lay outside public control, was in due course added a passion for flattery
or else a hatred for autocrats... Adulation bears the ugly taint of
subservience, but malice gives the false impression of being independent..."
(The Histories; I.I.; Tr. K. Wellesley; London; 1964.)
25. It is to be noted that the seal to the establishment of Gyges on the
throne of Candaules, otherwise known as Myrsilus last king of Hittite
descent on the throne of Lydia, and who he had cuckolded and destroyed,
apparently with the ready assistance of Candaules' wife, was the
pronouncement of the Pythian Oracle (Herodotus, Book I). Clearly the Oracles
would be one of the most important instruments of the international money
creative power towards the furtherance of its purposes; and it would have
sought, as much as possible, to keep them under its control.
26. John Richard Green: A Short History of the English Peoples, P. 205;
27. A. Andreades: History of the Bank of England, P. 73; London; 1966.
28. R.A.G. Carson: Coins, Ancient, Medieval, and Modern, P. 106.
29. A. Andreades: History of the Bank of England, P. xxvii. In the words of
H.S. Foxwell who wrote the preface to this work in giving the reasons why no
adequate history of the Bank of England appears to have been written
previous to Andreades:
"The first is the remarkable absence of official
records in connection with the Bank, especially for the first century of its
activity. It has often been observed that the English are peculiarly
fortunate in this matter of records;... The Bank of England stands out as a
striking exception to the rule. It never seems to have published any reports
or even to have preserved its own minutes and accounts."
30. Herodotus: The Histories, Book I.
Back to Contents