This is a specific subject page, dealing exclusively with, or primarily with, the subject in the title. Because of need, there are many such pages at RHWW: usually, but not always, linked to primary pages. For those in a hurry, they enable a quick summary of many important subjects. The menu for these pages is here: Click>>>



The Alexander Mosaic - Revealed!


In the "Fantasy" world of Whites, they can say anything, and show anything, and the rest of the world is suppose to believe it. Fake artifacts are nothing new for them, they have probably created tens-of-thousands of them. But one that is particularly bare-faced and brash, is the so-called "Alexander Mosaic".

From Wiki:

The Alexander Mosaic, dating from circa 100 B.C, is a famous Roman floor mosaic originally from the House of the Faun in Pompeii. It depicts a battle between the armies of Alexander the Great and Darius III of Persia and measures 5.82 x 3.13m (19 ft x 10 ft 3in). The mosaic illustrates a battle in which Alexander faced and attempted to capture or kill Darius. Alexander defeated the Persian leader twice, first at the 333 B.C. Battle of Issus, and two years later at the Battle of Gaugamela. The work is traditionally believed to show the Battle of Issus. The mosaic is held to be a copy of either a painting by Apelles, a contemporary with Alexander himself, or of a lost late 4th century B.C. fresco by the painter Philoxenos of Eretria. The question that immediately comes to mind is: For you to know that this is a copy, you must know of the original. WHERE IS THE ORIGINAL?


One look, and any fool knows that it is a fraud, because Persians were Black people!


In examining the stupidity of this particular fraud, the first questions that come to mind are: It is suppose to be from 100 B.C. and found in Pompeii, a ROMAN city in the middle of Italy. Romans were NOT particularly fond of Greeks at that time - why would they have a mosaic of Alexander - a Greek?


Now lets look at what is supposed to be Alexander. Note that his armor is not a single piece, but is made-up of plates. And he has a PICTURE in the middle? Greeks were not known to have images on their armor breastplates.


This coin of Alexander, shows him with a single-piece breastplate with no picture.



Comparing to other known Greek armor, we also see single-piece breastplate with no picture.



As a matter of fact: the "Supposed" Alexander is wearing armor made-up of plates, more typical of ROMAN armor!





Now lets look at the so-called Persians.



We see that the chariot driver is wearing a hood with a point at the top. The only people who wore such garments were the Whites from Asia, such as the well-known Roman enemies the Goths and Scythians, among others.



We know the Persians didn't wear such garments, because we have this coin of Persian king Artaxerxes III in his chariot.


And we know that Persian soldiers didn't wear clothing like that, because we have pictures of Persian soldiers, PLUS: Herodotus's description of the clothing Persian soldiers wore.


Now lets read how Herodotus describes Persian soldiers and Cavalrymen.


The Histories of Herodotus
The Persian Wars


[7.40] Then the king's orders were obeyed; and the army marched out between the two halves of the carcase. First of all went the baggage-bearers, and the sumpter-beasts, and then a vast crowd of many nations mingled together without any intervals, amounting to more than one half of the army. After these troops an empty space was left, to separate between them and the king. In front of the king went first a thousand horsemen, picked men of the Persian nation - then spearmen a thousand, likewise chosen troops, with their spearheads pointing towards the ground - next ten of the sacred horses called Nisaean, all daintily caparisoned. (Now these horses are called Nisaean, because they come from the Nisaean plain, a vast flat in Media, producing horses of unusual size.) After the ten sacred horses came the holy chariot of Jupiter, drawn by eight milk-white steeds, with the charioteer on foot behind them holding the reins; for no mortal is ever allowed to mount into the car. Next to this came Xerxes himself, riding in a chariot drawn by Nisaean horses, with his charioteer, Patiramphes, the son of Otanes, a Persian, standing by his side.

[7.41] Thus rode forth Xerxes from Sardis - but he was accustomed every now and then, when the fancy took him, to alight from his chariot and travel in a litter. Immediately behind the king there followed a body of a thousand spearmen, the noblest and bravest of the Persians, holding their lances in the usual manner - then came a thousand Persian horse, picked men - then ten thousand, picked also after the rest, and serving on foot. Of these last one thousand carried spears with golden pomegranates at their lower end instead of spikes; and these encircled the other nine thousand, who bore on their spears pomegranates of silver. The spearmen too who pointed their lances towards the ground had golden pomegranates; and the thousand Persians who followed close after Xerxes had golden apples. Behind the ten thousand footmen came a body of Persian cavalry, likewise ten thousand; after which there was again a void space for as much as two furlongs; and then the rest of the army followed in a confused crowd.

[7.61] Now these were the nations that took part in this expedition. The Persians, who wore on their heads the soft hat called the Tiara, and about their bodies, tunics with sleeves of divers colours, having iron scales upon them like the scales of a fish. Their legs were protected by trousers; and they bore wicker shields for bucklers; their quivers hanging at their backs, and their arms being a short spear, a bow of uncommon size, and arrows of reed. They had likewise daggers suspended from their girdles along their right thighs.




























[7.62] The Medes had exactly the same equipment as the Persians; and indeed the dress common to both is not so much Persian as Median.

[7.83] The whole of the infantry was under the command of these generals, excepting the Ten Thousand. The Ten Thousand, who were all Persians and all picked men, were led by Hydarnes, the son of Hydarnes. They were called "the Immortals," for the following reason. If one of their body failed either by the stroke of death or of disease, forthwith his place was filled up by another man, so that their number was at no time either greater or less than 10,000.

Of all the troops the Persians were adorned with the greatest magnificence, and they were likewise the most valiant. Besides their arms, which have been already described, they glittered all over with gold, vast quantities of which they wore about their persons. They were followed by litters, wherein rode their concubines, and by a numerous train of attendants handsomely dressed. Camels and sumpter-beasts carried their provision, apart from that of the other soldiers.

[7.84] All these various nations fight on horseback; they did not, however, at this time all furnish horsemen, but only the following:- The Persians, who were armed in the same way as their own footmen, excepting that some of them wore upon their heads devices fashioned with the hammer in brass or steel.



Well, now we know that the mosaic involves neither Greeks nor Persians: So then, who are they?






From the armor of the "Supposed" Alexander, we know that he is in fact - a ROMAN!

Only two Roman Emperors are known to be depicted with a picture on their breastplates: Trajan and his Successor Hadrian.



Having solved the mystery of who the so-called Alexander actually is: who then is Trajan fighting, all we know for sure is that they are not Persians!


Almost all of the White Central Asian tribesmen who had migrated to West Asia wore hoods, some with points.

(The Persians conquered them and made them tribute paying vassals to the Persian Empire.

These relief's are of tribute bears to the Persian king Darius, found on the great Apadana stairway).


So then, to narrow it down; we must ask, who did Trajan defeat that was worthy of a mosaic?

From Trajans history: His conquest of Dacia enriched the empire greatly — the new province possessed many valuable gold mines. His war against the Parthian Empire ended with the sack of the capital Ctesiphon and the annexation of Armenia and Mesopotamia.

There we have it - It is the Parthian's!

The Parthian Empire (247 BC – 224 AD), also known as the Arsacid Empire was a major Iranian political and cultural power in what had been ancient Persia. Its latter name comes from Arsaces I of Parthia who, as leader of the Parni tribe, founded it in the mid-3rd century BC when he conquered the Parthia region in Iran's northeast, then a satrapy (province) in rebellion against the Seleucid Empire. Mithridates I of Parthia greatly expanded the empire by seizing Media and Mesopotamia from the Seleucids. At its height, the Parthian Empire stretched from the northern reaches of the Euphrates, in what is now south-eastern Turkey, to eastern Iran. The empire, located on the Silk Road trade route between the Roman Empire in the Mediterranean Basin and Han Empire of China, became a center of trade and commerce.





The Parthians largely adopted the art, architecture, religious beliefs, and royal insignia of their culturally heterogeneous empire, which encompassed Persian, Hellenistic, and regional cultures. For about the first half of its existence, the Arsacid court adopted elements of Greek culture, though it eventually saw a gradual revival of Iranian traditions. The Arsacid rulers were titled the "King of Kings", as a claim to be the heirs to the Achaemenid Persian Empire; indeed, they accepted many local kings as vassals where the Persians would have had centrally appointed, albeit largely autonomous, satraps. The court did appoint a small number of satraps, largely outside Iran, but these satrapies were smaller and less powerful than the Persian potentates. With the expansion of Arsacid power, the seat of central government shifted from Nisa, Turkmenistan to Ctesiphon along the Tigris (south of modern Baghdad, Iraq), although several other sites also served as capitals.


The reason why we can be sure that the figure in the mosaic is Trajan, and not his Successor Hadrian:

Upon his ascension to the throne, Hadrian withdrew from Trajan's conquests in Mesopotamia and Armenia, and even considered abandoning Dacia - he never fought them!




Click for Realhistoryww Home Page