Sunday, October 18, 2026

David of Georgia a new King David

 



 

“In 1106, David founded the Gelati Monastery and Academy.

The finest Georgian thinkers, philosophers, theologians, and scholars

of the time gathered here. Some historians even called Gelati “a new Athens”

and “a second Jerusalem.” David believed that a strong state is not built on a

strong army alone — it also needed education”.

 

TSNOBISTVIS.COM

 

 

July 31, 2026

David IV the Builder — How the King of a Small Country Turned Georgia into One of the Strongest Medieval States | TSNOBISTVIS.COM

 

David IV the Builder — How the King of a Small Country

Turned Georgia into One of the Strongest Medieval States

 

There are many kings in history who have won wars. Many have also conquered new lands. But very few were given a name by their own people that reflected their greatest accomplishment.

 

In the history of Georgia, one such ruler is David IV, whom posterity named “the Builder” (Agmashenebeli) — a king who not only won battles, but restored a nearly ruined country into a strong and unified state.

Today, almost nine centuries later, David the Builder is a national hero to Georgians and, in the eyes of historians, one of the most distinguished statesmen of the Middle Ages.

 

At the end of the 11th century, Georgia was in a severe crisis. The Seljuk Empire regularly devastated the country. Many cities and villages were destroyed, the population was abandoning their homes, the economy had almost collapsed, and the royal authority was significantly weakened.

 

In 1098, the First Crusade in Europe ended successfully, and Jerusalem was taken by the Christians. During the exact same era, in the Caucasus, little Georgia was fighting for its very existence.

 

In 1089, a young king of only 16 years ascended the throne — David IV. At that time, few could have imagined that in a few decades, this small country would turn into one of the strongest states in the region.

 

The King Who First Built the State

 

David realized that winning battles alone was not enough. First, a strong state had to be created. He carried out reforms that completely transformed Georgia:

 

·       Central authority was strengthened.

·       A professional army was created.

·       The tax system was organized.

·       Reforms were carried out in the Church.

·       Intelligence gathering was developed.

·       The rule of law was strengthened.

·       Tens of thousands of Kipchak warriors were settled in the country, who later became a significant part of the Georgian army.

 

In modern terms, David was not just a military leader — he was simultaneously a reformer, economist, diplomat, and strategist.

 

Didgori — The Battle That Changed History

 

In 1121, a Seljuk coalition assembled against Georgia. Their goal was simple — to put an end to Georgia’s rise. The enemy significantly outnumbered the Georgians, but David made brilliant use of the terrain, the element of surprise, and the high fighting spirit of his army.

 

On August 12, on the field of Didgori, the Georgians won a brilliant victory. A Georgian chronicler called this victory a “Miraculous Victory” (Dzlevai Sakvirveli). Military historians today still consider the Battle of Didgori as one of the best examples of how a well-planned strategy can defeat a numerically superior army.

 

The Recovery of Tbilisi

 

One year after the victory at Didgori, David liberated Tbilisi. In 1122, the city became the capital of Georgia. This marked the end of a centuries-old era when a large part of Tbilisi was in the hands of foreign rulers. The political unification of the country was practically complete.

 

Merely a Warrior?

 

David the Builder is often remembered only for his military successes. In reality, his greatest achievements were the deeds accomplished during peacetime. During his reign:

 

·       Roads were built.

·       Schools were opened.

·       Trade flourished.

·       Security in the country increased significantly.

·       Georgia became an important part of international trade routes.

 

The Gelati Academy — A Medieval Center of Knowledge

 

Gelati Monastery — a cultural and educational center

founded by King David IV the Builder.

 

In 1106, David founded the Gelati Monastery and Academy. The finest Georgian thinkers, philosophers, theologians, and scholars of the time gathered here. Some historians even called Gelati “a new Athens” and “a second Jerusalem.”

 

Damien Mackey’s comments: I was waiting for this, “a second Jerusalem”.

Actually, I was waiting for David IV as “a new King David”, “a second King David”.  

 

We have already encountered a couple of these new Davids in pseudo-history.

For instance, in my article:

 

Something almost miraculous about our emperor Heraclius

 

(2) Something almost miraculous about our emperor Heraclius

 

we read this (my emphasis): “According to Shaun Tougher, The Reign of Leo VI (886-912): Politics and People: “Heraclius … appears to have been intent on establishing himself as a new David …”.

 

{It does not help matters that Heraclius had a son, David, named after King David: David (son of Heraclius) - Wikipedia “He was born after the emperor and empress had visited Jerusalem and his given name reflects a deliberate attempt to link the imperial family with the Biblical David”.} 

 

And we also met the French king, Pepin “the Short”, as “the new King David”:

 

Solomon and Charlemagne

 

(2) Solomon and Charlemagne

 

In the same article, we learned about Pepin’s famous son - and same may by now have even anticipated this: “Emperor Charlemagne’s life bears some uncanny likenesses to that of the ancient King Solomon of Israel and his family”.

 

Pepin, a new King David.

His son, Charlemagne, a second King Solomon.

 

The Golden Age of David and Solomon, an era famous for its Wisdom and culture, its literature, but also for its prosperity, its building works, and its internationality, is reflected in David IV’s supposed reforms, with an emphasis on education.

For, as the article continues:

 

David believed that a strong state is not built on a strong army alone — it also needed education.

 

Why Was David’s Victory Important for the Christian World?

 

David the Builder ruled the country during the period when the Crusades were taking place in Europe and the Middle East. By that time, Georgia had become one of the strongest Christian states in the East.

 

The victory at Didgori significantly weakened Seljuk influence in the South Caucasus and proved that defeating their massive coalition was possible. While historians do not claim that Didgori directly altered the course of the Crusades, it is clear that this victory had a major political and moral impact on the Christian world.

 

Damien Mackey’s comments: The dubious David IV (sometimes called II) was almost an exact contemporary of the pitifully poorly attested, the supposed founder of the Knights Templar:

 

A Huge Pain trying to find a history of Hugues de Payens

 

(3) A Huge Pain trying to find a history of Hugues de Payens

 

This, in turn, does nothing at all to inspire one’s confidence in the dates conventionally assigned to David IV and to the First Crusade.

 

It all becomes even more murky if there is any validity to my article of these parallels:

 

Crusaders very much like the Maccabees, Seleucids like Seljuks

 

(3) Crusaders very much like the Maccabees, Seleucids like Seljuks

 

Does the following describe mediƦval times “in the East”, or the Golden Age of kings Solomon and David of Israel?

 

A strong Christian state emerged in the East, which not only preserved its independence but also became one of the leading regional powers. David’s story is not just the history of Georgia. It is the story of how a small country managed to survive surrounded by powerful neighbors. How a young king managed to restore a ruined state. How, alongside military victory, education, economy, and state institutions can become the foundation of a nation’s strength.

 

In world history, rulers like Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, Charlemagne, or Napoleon are frequently remembered. David the Builder is far less known internationally, yet his statecraft and reforms provide every reason to rank him among the most successful rulers of the Middle Ages.

 

Damien Mackey’s comment: It may be fitting that the writer names here, alongside established historical figures, Alexander and Napoleon, the fictitious composite  character, Julius Caesar, and Charlemagne, who is similarly historically dubious as is David IV. See e.g. my articles:

 

Julius Caesar legends borrowed, in part, from life of Jesus Christ

 

(3) Julius Caesar legends borrowed, in part, from life of Jesus Christ

 

and:

Solomon and Charlemagne

 

(3) Solomon and Charlemagne

 

Legacy

 

Today, David the Builder’s name is borne by universities, streets, cathedrals, and state awards in Georgia. The period of his reign is considered the beginning of the Georgian people’s “Golden Age.”

 

However, perhaps his greatest legacy lies neither in his victories nor in the cathedrals he built. His main legacy is the idea that even a small country can create great history if it has a visionary leader, a strong state, and a united society.

 

That is why David IV is not only a national hero of Georgia today, but also one of the most outstanding statesmen of the Middle Ages — an example of a leader whose life proves that wise governance and the right reforms can change the course of history, regardless of a country’s size or geopolitical challenges.

[End of article]

 

Sadly, the Old Testament parallels do not end there.

 

You see, David IV supposedly married a girl called Tamar, a Jewish name of one who, in the Bible, was the actual daughter of King David of Israel:

Queen Tamar: The Confident Female Ruler of the Georgian Golden Age | Ancient Origins

 

What this 2016 article does get right, at least, is that the life of Queen Tamar of Georgia coincided with a Golden Age. On this, see e.g. my article:

 

The vicissitudinous life of Solomon’s pulchritudinous wife

 

(3) The vicissitudinous life of Solomon's pulchritudinous wife

 

Queen Tamar: The Confident Female Ruler of the Georgian Golden Age

 

Queen Tamar was a ruler of Georgia who lived between the 12th and 13th centuries AD. This monarch presided over what is today known as the Georgian Golden Age. This was a period that began in the 12th century AD with the reign of King David IV (the Builder), and ended shortly after the death of Queen Tamar in the early 13th centuries AD. Within this golden age, the period of Tamar’s reign has sometimes been regarded as the point when the Kingdom of Georgia was at its zenith.

 

Co-Ruling Georgia

 

Queen Tamar was born in 1166 AD to King George III and Queen Burdukhan. Tamar was the royal couple’s first child, and it has been claimed that the Georgian king decided that when his daughter reached the age of 12, she would be his co-ruler. ….

 

 

Tuesday, October 13, 2026

A Sassanian conquest of Jerusalem during the lifetime of Mohammed?

 



by 

Damien F. Mackey

 

“In the aftermath of the fall of Jerusalem to the Sasanian–Jewish alliance, the city initially descended into chaos and disorder, although reconstruction began soon. On Khosrow’s orders, the Sasanian army located the True Cross, which Christians believe was used to crucify Jesus in 30 or 33,

and moved it to Ctesiphon”.

 Wikipedia

 

A whole bunch of characters who seem to have biblical origins, and who appear in the ridiculously un-historical story of the supposed Byzantine emperor, Heraclius, re-emerge in the account of the so-called Sassanian assault upon Jerusalem (614 AD).

Some of these characters I introduced early in my recent article:

 

The historical basis for that wonderful, nutty Heraclius

 

(1) The historical basis for that wonderful, nutty Heraclius

 

as follows:

 

His historical basis

 

Given that the presumed contemporaries of emperor Heraclius as referred to above: Jonah; Nehemiah; Shahrbaraz; Mohammed; plus the city of Nineveh; were all biblically based – {Jonah as the prophet Jonah; Nehemiah as the Tirshatha Nehemiah; Shahrbaraz as Sheshbazzar (Ezra 1:8); Mohammed as a biblical composite; and Nineveh as the Assyrian capital of Nineveh} – then  one might logically consider that the emperor Heraclius, too, who most certainly cannot have been a genuine historical character (see article above), was based upon some notable biblical hero.

 

If so, then who may have been that biblical person?

 

Well Heraclius is most famous for the “Battle of Nineveh” which he is supposed to have won convincingly. Thus, we could begin by considering some Old Testament notable who had success against Nineveh, and/or the Assyrians.

Someone preferably with a name compatible with Heraclius.

 

We do not have to go very far to find him.

 

The most famous victory against the Assyrians, the defeat of Sennacherib’s 185,000, attested not only in various books of the Bible but also in e.g. Greco-Roman literature, occurred during the reign of King Hezekiah, whose name, with the replacement of the letter z with an r, and the removal of the added theophoric element (iah) at the end, becomes, virtually, Herac-lius. Thus:

 

He[z]ek-      iah

He[r]ac-[l]ius

 

Although I would not anticipate any really tight correspondence between the historical, well-documented reign of King Hezekiah of Judah and the deliciously crazy, fictitious, reign of the emperor Heraclius, I would nonetheless expect to be able to identify certain strange biblical afterglows in the haphazard story of the latter. ….

[End of quote]

 

Now, compare this with this standard account of the:

Sasanian conquest of Jerusalem

Sasanian conquest of Jerusalem - Wikipedia

 

The Sasanian conquest of Jerusalem in early 614 was a significant development in the Byzantine–Sasanian War of 602–628. It was the result of a major offensive by the Sasanian Empire across the Fertile Crescent, culminating in the annexation of Jerusalem and Palaestina Prima as a whole. The Sasanian advance had been bolstered by the timely outbreak of the Jewish revolt against Heraclius, owing to decades of persecution of Jews and Samaritans by the Byzantine Empire, although the Heraclian dynasty itself had only been in power for four years.

 

Mackey’s comment: Here, for starters, we encounter the non-historical Heraclius.

 

In 613, Sasanian king Khosrow II had appointed his army chief Shahrbaraz to lead a campaign into the Byzantines' Diocese of the East. Under Shahrbaraz's command, the Sasanian army proceeded to secure victories at Antioch and Caesarea Maritima, which was the administrative capital of Palaestina Prima. ….  By this time, the grand inner harbour had silted up and was useless, but the city continued to be an important maritime hub after Byzantine emperor Anastasius I Dicorus ordered the outer harbour's reconstruction.

 

Mackey’s comment: Shahrbaraz, as noted above, stands for the prince of Judah, Sheshbazzar (Ezra 1:8), at the time of King Cyrus of Medo-Persia (c. 500 BC).

 

Khosrow II must, thus, for his part, represent Cyrus himself.

 

However, it is not quite that simple.

 

Khosrow II, a supposed Sassanian, also appears to act as an alter ego for the ancient neo-Assyrian Great King, Sennacherib (c. 700 BC).

 

So Khosrow must be something of a composite character.

 

As I wrote about Khosrow in my article:

 

….

Heraclius drove the Persians out of Asia Minor and pushed deep into their territory, defeating them in 627 at the Battle of Nineveh and devastating much of Mesopotamia.

 

My comment: Not quite right. After Judith’s intervention, the Jews were able to drive the Assyrians right out of the land of Israel and back to Mesopotamia, with the enemy suffering massive losses. This was the basis for Heraclius’s so-called Battle of Nineveh. Not 627 AD, but more like c. 700 BC!

 

The Persian Shah Khosrow II was overthrown and executed by his son Kavad II, who soon sued for a peace treaty, agreeing to withdraw from all occupied territory.

 

My comment: Not long after Sennacherib’s crushing defeat, he was indeed assassinated – but by two of his sons, not one.

Khosrow may be something of a title, like e.g. Pharaoh. (Or, is it a variant for Assyria?)

“The Persian Shah Khosrow II”, here, must stand for Sennacherib, the Great King of Assyria. Whilst the “son Kavad II” - though presumably representing Sennacherib’s murderers, Adrammelech and Sharezer (cf. 2 Kings 19:37) - equates better name-wise, however, to Sennacherib’s non-regicide successor, Esarhaddon. Thus:

 

E-sa[r]had-don

      KA        VAD

 

Unlike in the Heraclius-Khosrow II scenario, the Assyrian regicide pair can be historically identified:

 

Adrammelech and Sharezer murdered king Sennacherib

 

(3) Adrammelech and Sharezer murdered king Sennacherib

 

Heraclius won the war, but his Empire was deeply strained.

 

My comment: Sadly, everything about emperor Heraclius and his supposed “Empire” is “deeply strained”. ….

[End of quote]


Successfully capturing the city and the harbour had given the Sasanians strategic access to the Mediterranean Sea … and their ranks were reinforced by Nehemiah ben Hushiel … and Benjamin of Tiberias, who enlisted and armed Jewish rebels throughout Galilee, including the cities of Tiberias and Nazareth. In total, between 20,000 and 26,000 Jewish rebels joined the Sasanian army's assault on Byzantine Jerusalem. …. By mid-614, the Sasanians had taken the city, but sources vary on whether this occurred without resistance from the Byzantine army …  or after a siege and breaching of the wall with artillery.

 

Mackey’s comment: Here is another of our biblical characters, Nehemiah.

See my article on this – the situation is actually quite remarkable:

 

Supposedly two officials ‘Nehemiah’ occupying BC time and AD time

 

(4) Supposedly two officials 'Nehemiah' occupying BC time and AD time

 

So, in the course of the one Sassanian invasion, we find ourselves jumping from the era of Sennacherib and Hezekiah (c. 700 BC), to the time of Nehemiah and Artaxerxes (c. 600 BC), and then down to the time of the Medo-Persian king, Cyrus (c. 500 BC) – all a good millennium before 614 AD!

 

In the aftermath of the fall of Jerusalem to the Sasanian–Jewish alliance, the city initially descended into chaos and disorder, although reconstruction began soon. On Khosrow's orders, the Sasanian army located the True Cross, which Christians believe was used to crucify Jesus in 30 or 33, and moved it to Ctesiphon.

 

Mackey’s comment: A nice pious story, but impossibly un-historical.

 

The Sasanian conquest interrupted the centuries-long Byzantine ban on Jewish entry into Jerusalem, and Jews were able to enter the city for the first time since the Bar Kokhba revolt in 136.

 

Mackey’s comment: If we are actually somewhere in the neo-Assyrian and Medo-Persian eras of BC history, then the revolt of Bar Kochba will not occur yet for a good half a millennium and more.

 

Sources for Christian casualties during this period vary greatly, with some placing the number of dead and wounded in the low thousands and others in the tens of thousands or higher. The Byzantines eventually recovered their lost territories before being pushed out indefinitely by the Muslim conquest of the Levant in 638, whereafter the ban on Jews was lifted and Christian rule over Jerusalem ended until the Crusades. ….

 

Mackey’s comment: But, on those Crusades, see e.g. my article:

 

Maccabeans and Crusaders Seleucids and Saltukids Seljuks

 

(4) Maccabeans and Crusaders Seleucids and Saltukids Seljuks

 

Tuesday, October 6, 2026

The historical basis for that wonderful, nutty Heraclius

 



by

Damien F. Mackey

  

 

“Heraclius seems to have one foot in Davidic Israel, one in the old

Roman Republic, and, whatever feet may be left, in the Christian era.

What a mix of a man is this emperor Heraclius! What a conundrum!

What a puzzle!”

 

Introduction

 

The supposed Byzantine emperor, Heraclius (610-641 AD), is a total historical mis-fit.

And an hilarious one at that!

In an exchange, today (5th October, 2026), with other interested persons, I wrote:

 

…. My big problem with the larger-than-life Jay Smith, though, and with Patricia Crone, is that they greatly complicate matters, becoming almost unreadable, unlistenable, by trying to consider Mohammed in a murky conventional C7th AD context.

Those Germans who have been radically revising what we have called AD history, and who have been removing the ‘Dark Ages’ – {many of whose conclusions I personally would not accept, I need to say} - have a much better idea of how to approach all of this. A lot of text book ‘history’ simply needs to be completely cleared out, emptied, not fossicked about in.

For there must be something seriously wrong with a C7th AD scenario that presents us with another biblical Jonah; another biblical Nehemiah; another biblical Sheshbazzar (Shahrbaraz); another biblical Nineveh; and the biblical composite ‘Mohammed’.

A scholar cannot work amongst that sort of artificiality!

But the champion of the whole fictitious circus is the ringmaster himself, the most splendid, most spectacular, Heraclius (610-641 AD), a younger contemporary of ‘Mohammed’. Most famous is this marvellous Byzantine wonder-working emperor - a veritable Don Quixote on steroids - for the “Battle of Nineveh” (627 AD), no less.

I got great fun out of writing:

 

Something almost miraculous about our emperor Heraclius

 

(9) Something almost miraculous about our emperor Heraclius

 

“Heraclius seems to have one foot in Davidic Israel, one in the old

Roman Republic, and, whatever feet may be left (because this definitely cannot be right), in the Christian era. What a mix of a man is this emperor Heraclius! What a conundrum! What a puzzle!”

 

While Mohammed may be a far-ranging biblical composite, the emperor Heraclius is what I have called “a composite to end all composites”. Perhaps only Donald Trump has claimed more hats than were supposedly worn by Heraclius - except that the latter is hilarious fiction, Trump is neither.

 

For the beginnings of my efforts (not as yet convincingly well co-ordinated) to reform the conventional C7th AD, see my article:

 

Scrutinising the C7th AD for its conundrums and anachronisms

 

(1)  Scrutinising the C7th AD for its conundrums and anachronisms

 

His historical basis

 

Given that the presumed contemporaries of emperor Heraclius as referred to above: Jonah; Nehemiah; Shahrbaraz; Mohammed; plus the city of Nineveh; were all biblically based – {Jonah as the prophet Jonah; Nehemiah as the Tirshatha Nehemiah; Shahrbaraz as Sheshbazzar (Ezra 1:8); Mohammed as a biblical composite; and Nineveh as the Assyrian capital of Nineveh} – then  one might logically consider that the emperor Heraclius, too, who most certainly cannot have been a genuine historical character (see article above), was based upon some notable biblical hero.

 

If so, then who may have been that biblical person?

 

Well Heraclius is most famous for the “Battle of Nineveh” which he is supposed to have won convincingly. Thus, we could begin by considering some Old Testament notable who had success against Nineveh, and/or the Assyrians.

Someone preferably with a name compatible with Heraclius.

 

We do not have to go very far to find him.

 

The most famous victory against the Assyrians, the defeat of Sennacherib’s 185,000, attested not only in various books of the Bible but also in e.g. Greco-Roman literature, occurred during the reign of King Hezekiah, whose name, with the replacement of the letter z with an r, and the removal of the added theophoric element (iah) at the end, becomes, virtually, Herac-lius. Thus:

 

He[z]ek-      iah

He[r]ac-[l]ius

 

Although I would not anticipate any really tight correspondence between the historical, well-documented reign of King Hezekiah of Judah and the deliciously crazy, fictitious, reign of the emperor Heraclius, I would nonetheless expect to be able to identify certain strange biblical afterglows in the haphazard story of the latter.  

 

Let us take a brief peek at some of what convention dishes up as the life and career of Heraclius: Heraclius - Wikipedia

 

….

Heraclius's reign was marked by wars against the Persians and the Arabs.

 

My comment: For “Persians”, read Assyrians.

 

Heraclius immediately took charge of the Byzantine–Sasanian War of 602–628 upon his accession, but his leadership initially did little to stem Persian ascendency in the war; after personally losing the Battle of Antioch (613), the Persians were able to take Syria and Egypt, reducing the Empire to Asia Minor.

 

My comment: This was King Sennacherib of Assyria’s successful Third Campaign (Year 9), fused with the later, ill-fated campaign led by his son, Ashur-nadin-shumi (the “Holofernes” of the Book of Judith).

 

Heraclius, however, avoided total defeat and initiated reforms to rebuild and strengthen the military.

 

My comment: Hezekiah virtually endured total defeat with his main forts all destroyed and with Jerusalem under siege. He was, indeed, a reforming king par excellence, following on from the good example of his ancestor, David, and he did fortify Jerusalem and secure the water supply. 

 

Heraclius drove the Persians out of Asia Minor and pushed deep into their territory, defeating them in 627 at the Battle of Nineveh and devastating much of Mesopotamia.

 

My comment: Not quite right. After Judith’s intervention, the Jews were able to drive the Assyrians right out of the land of Israel and back to Mesopotamia, with the enemy suffering massive losses. This was the basis for Heraclius’s so-called Battle of Nineveh. Not 627 AD, but more like c. 700 BC!

 

The Persian Shah Khosrow II was overthrown and executed by his son Kavad II, who soon sued for a peace treaty, agreeing to withdraw from all occupied territory.

 

My comment: Not long after Sennacherib’s crushing defeat, he was indeed assassinated – but by two of his sons, not one.

Khosrow may be something of a title, like e.g. Pharaoh. (Or, is it a variant for Assyria?)

 

“The Persian Shah Khosrow II”, here, must stand for Sennacherib, the Great King of Assyria. Whilst the “son Kavad II” - though presumably representing Sennacherib’s murderers, Adrammelech and Sharezer (cf. 2 Kings 19:37) - equates better name-wise, however, to Sennacherib’s non-regicide successor, Esarhaddon. Thus:

 

E-sa[r]had-don

      KA        VAD

 

Unlike in the Heraclius-Khosrow II scenario, the Assyrian regicide pair can be historically identified:

 

Adrammelech and Sharezer murdered king Sennacherib

 

(3) Adrammelech and Sharezer murdered king Sennacherib

 

Heraclius won the war, but his Empire was deeply strained.

 

My comment: Sadly, everything about emperor Heraclius and his supposed “Empire” is “deeply strained”.