Three Days After The Inventory Leak - r/TheEternalSoldier
u/DeepStateDigger: Okay.
OKAY.
So you know the inventory. The 47-page insurance document. The thing I said was the greatest document in human history.
Still great. Top five forever. No notes.
THIS IS BETTER.
The inventory mentioned a modern personal journal. "Mostly sarcastic observations. Not for public consumption. Seriously. Don't read this. I mean it."
I read it.
[Uploads 63 photographs of handwritten notebook pages]
[1.1 million upvotes in 28 minutes - NEW RECORD]
u/TinfoilTina: YOU FOUND THE JOURNAL
u/DeepStateDigger: I found the journal.
Before anyone asks: yes I know what "not for public consumption" means. Yes I am sharing it anyway. Yes I have already spoken to three lawyers. I'm fine. Probably.
It's written in whatever pen he had nearby. The handwriting changes slightly across entries - he writes faster when he's annoyed, which is often. Every single page has "NOT FOR PUBLIC CONSUMPTION" at the top in red ink. He writes it himself. Every time. On every page.
He knows humans find things. He has watched humans find things for 2,500 years. He writes the note anyway.
Going in order. Strap in.
THE PERSONAL OBSERVATIONS OF P. JACKSON
Not for public consumption.I mean it.Stop.
On Caesar (undated, ink suggests very old paper, possibly a very old notebook he's still adding to)
Julius was great. Genuinely one of the most naturally gifted commanders I've ever seen and I have seen a LOT. Charismatic, fast thinker, soldiers loved him, could read a room like nobody's business.
Also stubborn as a mule, couldn't take a hint if you wrapped it in a toga and handed it to him directly, and absolutely refused to believe anyone would actually go through with the whole knife thing even after I told him, specifically, "Julius, people are going to go through with the knife thing."
He did not listen.
I liked him anyway. Still have the coin. Not giving it back, he's been dead for 2,000 years, it's mine now.
The Shakespeare play got his personality completely wrong, by the way. He was funnier than that. Much funnier. The real Julius Caesar would have found "Et tu, Brute" extremely dramatic and probably made a joke. Will did not capture this. I told Will this. Will said drama was more interesting than accuracy. I said he wouldn't know, he wasn't there. He said that wasn't the point. We argued about it for two hours. He put the dramatic version in anyway.
Still annoyed.
[2.1 million upvotes]
u/DeepStateDigger: "I told him specifically, 'Julius, people are going to go through with the knife thing.'"
HE TRIED TO WARN CAESAR
u/ClassicalHistorianCollapsing: He warned Caesar. Caesar didn't listen. This is the most historically plausible thing I have ever read and I am devastated by it.
u/ShakespeareFanatic: "Will said drama was more interesting than accuracy. I said he wouldn't know, he wasn't there."
THE MOST DEVASTATING COMEBACK IN LITERARY HISTORY
u/TinfoilTina: two thousand years later and he's still annoyed about the personality
u/HistoryNerd_PhD: He has been quietly furious about Julius Caesar's dramatic portrayal for four centuries. Four centuries of watching productions and going "that's not right" and saying nothing. The self-control.
On Cleopatra (same old notebook)
Cleopatra was the smartest person in any room she walked into, always, and she knew it, and honestly fair enough because she was right.
Spoke nine languages. NINE. I speak more than that now but at the time I was only at seven and I was impressed. She could switch mid-sentence depending on who she was talking to and use whichever language made that person most comfortable, which sounds like a small thing but is actually a massive diplomatic weapon and she wielded it like one.
We worked together on some Greek administrative translations. She didn't need me, she spoke Greek fine, she just wanted a second opinion and also someone to complain to about Roman politics who wouldn't immediately go tell the Romans. I was that person. Good arrangement.
Just friends. We were JUST FRIENDS. I don't know where the other thing comes from. She was dealing with Caesar and then Antony and had more than enough going on, she didn't need me in the mix, and frankly I valued the professional relationship too much to complicate it. She was one of the best political minds I've ever met. You don't mess that up.
She gave me the ring as a thank you gift. It's in the vault. It stays in the vault. Every archaeologist on earth can calm down.
[1.8 million upvotes]
u/EgyptologyPhD: "Spoke nine languages. NINE. I speak more than that now but at the time I was only at seven and I was impressed."
HE WAS IMPRESSED BY CLEOPATRA'S LANGUAGES
A ~500 YEAR OLD (AT THAT TIME) IMMORTAL WAS IMPRESSED
u/DeepStateDigger: "She didn't need me, she spoke Greek fine, she just wanted someone to complain to about Roman politics who wouldn't immediately go tell the Romans."
He was Cleopatra's venting friend. He was the person she texted to say "ugh, Caesar is being SO much right now"
u/JustFriends_Apparently: "I valued the professional relationship too much to complicate it"
The most mature sentence ever written by anyone about anyone. 2,500 years old and he's PROFESSIONAL about it.
u/VaticanScholar: Nine languages. He was at seven. He has since added more. How many does he speak now. Someone ask him. Someone needs to ask him.
On Shakespeare (multiple entries, different pens, escalating energy)
Entry 1:
Met a playwright. Will Shakespeare. Talented. We had dinner, I told him some stories, he seemed very interested, paid for the meal which I appreciated. Good conversationalist. Bit dramatic but entertaining.
Entry 2 (different ink, clearly written later):
Will used the Denmark story.
I knew a prince in Denmark. Real guy, real situation, messy family dynamics, father died under suspicious circumstances, the whole thing. I told Will about it over drinks because it was a good story and he was good company.
Boom. Hamlet.
He didn't even change the country. DIDN'T EVEN CHANGE THE COUNTRY.
I got no credit. I got no royalties. I got my name spelled wrong in a dedication. One letter. Just "P." Like I'm a footnote.
It was a good play though. I'll give him that. He did something with it. The "to be or not to be" bit - that wasn't in the original story, that's all Will, I'll be honest. Credit where it's due.
Still want royalties.
Entry 3 (different ink again, angrier handwriting):
Romeo and Juliet.
I knew a couple. Star-crossed, wrong families, the whole disaster. True story, mostly. I told Will the story. I said "and then they both died." Will said that was sad. I said yes, it was sad, that's why I was telling him, it stuck with me.
Boom. Romeo and Juliet.
Except in the original story the girl didn't die. She was fine. She remarried and had four children and lived to 74. I told Will this. He said a happy ending was "dramatically unsatisfying." I said the real woman's family might have opinions about him killing her off for dramatic satisfaction. He said they were from Verona and would never know.
She was from Mantua, actually. He didn't even get the city right.
No royalties. Still.
Entry 4 (written in red ink, clearly at peak frustration):
MacBeth is also based on a real person I knew. I'm not doing this again. You know what you did, Will.
[3.4 million upvotes - ALL-TIME REDDIT RECORD]
u/DeepStateDigger: FOUR ENTRIES
FOUR ENTRIES ABOUT SHAKESPEARE
THE ESCALATING ANGER
THE RED INK
u/LiteraryScholarWeeping: "She was from Mantua, actually. He didn't even get the city right."
He's been quietly correcting Romeo and Juliet's geography for 400 years. FOR 400 YEARS. In a private notebook. That nobody was supposed to read.
u/ShakespeareanScholar: The real Juliet was fine. She remarried. She had four children. She lived to 74.
Shakespeare killed her off for drama and Perseus has been annoyed about it for four centuries.
u/TinfoilTina: "MacBeth is also based on a real person I knew. I'm not doing this again. You know what you did, Will."
HE COULDN'T EVEN FINISH THE ENTRY HE WAS TOO ANNOYED
u/DeepStateDigger: He switched to red ink. He was so annoyed he switched to red ink.
u/RoyaltiesWatch: Running tally from the journal so far:
Warned Caesar about the assassination: ignored
Helped Cleopatra with translations: got a ring, fine
Told Shakespeare every story: got one initial and no royalties
Corrected Romeo and Juliet geography: also ignored
This man has been RIGHT about everything for 2,500 years and nobody listens.
On Leonardo da Vinci
Leonardo was the most relentlessly, exhaustingly curious person I have ever met in 2,500 years and I say that as a compliment.
Most people, when they look at something, see what it is. Leonardo saw what it could be and also what it was made of and also how it connected to seventeen other things and also what it would look like from a different angle and also could it fly. Every conversation was an adventure because you never knew which direction it was going. You'd start talking about a river and forty minutes later you'd be discussing the structural load-bearing capacity of birds.
He gave me the notebook the year before he died. Said I was "the only person who had seen enough to understand what he was reaching for." I told him lots of people were brilliant. He said that wasn't what he meant.
I understood what he meant.
Miss that guy. He was genuinely fun. Also slightly unhinged but in a productive way.
The notebook is in the vault. The Louvre has been asking about it for decades. The answer is no. Leonardo gave it to ME. Mine.
(The flying machine sketches still don't work, for the record. I've looked at them a lot. The physics are wrong in three places. He was 300 years ahead of everyone but he still got those three things wrong and I think about it sometimes.)
[1.4 million upvotes]
u/ArtHistoryMeltdown: "Slightly unhinged but in a productive way" is the most accurate description of Leonardo da Vinci ever written and it was written by someone who actually knew him
u/MuseumDirectorCrying: The Louvre has been asking for decades. The answer is no. It's in the vault. Behind EMP shielding. With the Ark.
u/EngineeringNerd: HE FOUND THE THREE PHYSICS ERRORS IN DA VINCI'S FLYING MACHINES
He's been looking at them. Thinking about them. For 500 years.
u/DeepStateDigger: "The only person who had seen enough to understand what he was reaching for."
Da Vinci said this. To Perseus. Because it was true.
Because Perseus had literally seen the entire span of human history that da Vinci was trying to comprehend.
I need to go outside.
On Newton
Isaac Newton was one of the three most naturally brilliant people I've met. Top three, easily. Possibly top two. The work speaks for itself and the work is extraordinary.
The personality was a lot.
He was in a feud with Leibniz about the calculus for literally decades. DECADES. Every dinner, every letter, every conversation eventually found its way back to Leibniz. I explained, carefully and with evidence, that Leibniz had derived it independently and simultaneously and they were both right and the feud was pointless. I explained this four times. Four separate occasions with clear reasoning.
Newton looked at me each time like I had suggested the moon was a hat.
They were BOTH RIGHT. I know this. I watched both of them work it out. Neither of them knew I was watching both of them. This is the problem with operating across multiple countries under different names. You end up knowing things you can't explain.
The apple story is also completely made up. I asked him directly. He found it embarrassing. Please stop telling it.
Brilliant. Exhausting. Absolutely maddening to try to help. 7/10 would still have dinner with again because when he wasn't on about Leibniz he was actually fascinating.
[1.2 million upvotes]
u/PhysicsHistoryNerd: HE ASKED NEWTON ABOUT THE APPLE. NEWTON SAID IT WAS MADE UP AND EMBARRASSING.
u/DeepStateDigger: "He looked at me like I had suggested the moon was a hat"
This is the funniest sentence in the journal so far and there have been a lot of funny sentences
u/MathematiciansUnite: He watched both Newton AND Leibniz derive calculus independently. He knew they were both right. He couldn't tell either of them. He had to watch the feud play out for decades in real time knowing he had the answer.
That's not a 7/10. That's suffering.
u/AcademicRelatable: "Absolutely maddening to try to help" describes every brilliant person I have ever worked with and I feel seen by a 2,500-year-old immortal's private notebook
On Napoleon
Napoleon asked me to join his staff three times. Three times I said no. Three times he acted like no one had ever told him no about anything in his life.
Looking at the previous decade: probably true.
He wasn't wrong that I'd be useful. I've run more campaigns than anyone alive, that's just a fact. But there's a pattern I've seen enough times to recognize it from miles away. The advisors stop pushing back. The maps get bigger. Every conversation is about what comes next, never about what's enough. I saw it with Alexander. I saw it later with Caesar, a bit. And I was seeing it here, louder and faster than either of them.
I tried, once, to explain this to him. That the Russian campaign specifically was a trap shaped like an opportunity. He told me I was being cautious. I said I had some experience with overextension. He said experience was nothing without vision.
He had extraordinary vision. Right up until he couldn't see Russia in winter anymore.
I went to Switzerland. Waited it out. Came back. He was gone. History proceeded as expected.
Short-tempered, by the way. Very. Gets mentioned a lot that he was short in height, which is actually mostly British propaganda and I find it annoying on principle - he was about average for the time. The short-tempered part though, that part's true. That part everybody gets right.
[1.6 million upvotes]
u/NapoleonicScholar: "I saw it with Alexander. I saw it later with Caesar, a bit. And I was seeing it here, louder and faster than either of them."
He is making this comparison from MEMORY. Personal memory. He knew all three of them.
u/DeepStateDigger: "I said I had some experience with overextension."
THE UNDERSTATEMENT. THE BEAUTIFUL UNDERSTATEMENT.
2,500 years of watching empires overextend and he says he has "some experience."
u/SwitzerlandTourism: "I went to Switzerland. Waited it out."
He keeps going to Switzerland. Switzerland is his "this is about to go badly" destination. How many times has he just sat in Switzerland watching something collapse.
u/HistoricallyFurious: The height thing being British propaganda and him finding it annoying "on principle" is sending me. He's been quietly irritated about a propaganda campaign for 200 years. Just him and the historical record. Personally offended by misinformation.
On Einstein
I was in a café in Bern in 1905. Reading. Minding my own business.
A young man sat down at my table without asking. I was about to be annoyed. Then he said "I've been thinking about what happens to light if you're moving alongside it" and I put my book down and we talked for four hours.
His name was Albert Einstein. He was a patent clerk at the time. He's going to change everything - I knew it within the first twenty minutes. I've known a lot of clever people. Most clever people are certain. This one was curious. Still actually curious, like the questions delighted him, which is rarer than it sounds after you've been around long enough.
At some point he asked me what the strangest thing I'd ever seen was. I thought about it and said "people." He laughed and said that was his answer too.
Good four hours. Left thinking about time in a way I hadn't in a while, which is saying something given my specific situation.
He never knew what I was. I was just a man in a café who was interested in light. Fine by me. Some of the best conversations I've had have been with people who had no idea who they were talking to.
Came back, checked on him over the years. He turned out well. The hair got increasingly dramatic but the physics held up.
[1.9 million upvotes]
u/DeepStateDigger: "I put my book down"
Perseus Jackson. 2,500 years old. Has met Caesar, Cleopatra, da Vinci, Shakespeare, Newton, Napoleon.
Put his book down for Albert Einstein within twenty minutes.
That is the measure of Einstein.
u/PhysicistEmotional: "Most clever people are certain. This one was curious. Still actually curious, like the questions delighted him."
Perseus has been watching brilliant people for 2,500 years. He knows the difference. He noticed. He put his book down.
I'm fine. I'm completely fine.
u/CaféHistoryNerd: He was just a man in a café who was interested in light. Einstein never knew. They had four hours. Perseus walked away thinking about time.
Perseus Jackson has been thinking about time for 2,500 years and Einstein still gave him something new to think about.
u/TinfoilTina: "The hair got increasingly dramatic but the physics held up" is the best thing ever written about Einstein
On Fleming
Met a guy called Ian Fleming at an intelligence-adjacent event in 1952. Good company. Sharp. Funny in a dry way. The kind of man who listens more than he talks in a room, which I always respect.
He said he was writing something. A spy novel. Asked if he could base the main character "loosely" on me. His word: loosely. I said sure, why not, seemed harmless.
He bought me a drink. Cold, correct glass, properly made. Appreciated.
The character's name is James Bond.
I read Casino Royale when it came out. I have notes.
Bond orders his martini shaken, not stirred. I don't drink martinis. I told Ian this when he showed me the draft. He said "black coffee, no sugar" wasn't as interesting. I said accuracy mattered. He said he was writing fiction. Fair enough I suppose.
Bond drives an Aston Martin. I drive a sensible car with good fuel economy because I have been alive long enough to care about fuel economy and also I have been on enough operations to know that reliable and inconspicuous beats fast and flashy every single time. Ian knew this about me. He ignored it.
Bond has a different woman everywhere he goes. This is the part that I want to formally address for the record: just because I've had my fair share of company over 2,500 years does not make me a womanizer. I have a Tuesday coffee shop. I have a Friday bookshop. I am consistent and considerate and I have never, not once, introduced myself as "Jackson. Perseus Jackson" in a tuxedo.
Ian thought the tuxedo detail was funny. He's been dead since 1964 and I'm still having this conversation at dinner parties.
Twenty-seven films. TWENTY-SEVEN.
I said yes to ONE loosely-based character. One.
Lesson learned. Not repeating this. Ever.
[2.8 million upvotes]
u/DeepStateDigger: THE ESCALATION
"Sure, why not, seemed harmless"
"I have notes"
"TWENTY-SEVEN FILMS"
u/BondFanForever: "Just because I've had my fair share of company over 2,500 years does not make me a womanizer"
2,500 YEARS. FAIR SHARE. I'M CRYING.
u/LegallyDistancing: "I have never, not once, introduced myself as 'Jackson. Perseus Jackson' in a tuxedo"
He's thought about this. He's specifically thought about this. He wanted the record to reflect he has NEVER done the bit.
u/Whitmore_Sterling_Anon: There is a file at the firm.
It is labeled: FLEMING - DISTINCTION OF PERSON.
It is forty-one pages long.
It predates the first film.
He started building the paper trail in 1953.
I've said too much.
u/FilmHistoryNerd: Ian Fleming's editorial decision: "black coffee, no sugar" is less interesting than a shaken martini.
Perseus's response: "accuracy mattered."
Ian's response: "I'm writing fiction."
Perseus's response, 70 years and 27 films later: still annoyed, lesson learned, not repeating this ever.
On Medieval Royalty (one long entry, no specific date, clearly written all at once)
Quick overview since people keep asking me what medieval kings were actually like:
Annoying. All of them. Across the board. Every single one.
Not evil, mostly - there were exceptions but broadly they were just ordinary men who had been told since birth that God personally wanted them specifically to be in charge of everything, which is not a healthy developmental framework for anyone. The insecurity it creates is staggering. You'd think being king would make a person confident. It does the opposite. Every meal was a political statement. Every seating arrangement was a war. Someone was always slightly to the left of where they should be and two barons would be furious about it for weeks.
The paperwork was also unbelievable. People think medieval governance was simple. It was not simple. It was endless, badly organized, and frequently conducted in Latin by people who didn't fully speak Latin. I helped translate things constantly. Got paid in crowns and scepters I didn't ask for and don't use. They're all in the vault.
Charlemagne was the best of them, which is probably why he ended up running half of Europe. Still gave me a crown I didn't want. I told him I didn't want it. He said it was an honor. I said I understood that and also didn't want it. He insisted. I wore it once to be polite. Gave myself a headache. It's been in the vault since I got it.
Too heavy.
[1.1 million upvotes]
u/MedievalHistorian: "Every meal was a political statement. Every seating arrangement was a war."
This is the most accurate description of medieval court politics ever written. My entire PhD confirmed in two sentences by someone who was THERE.
u/DeepStateDigger: "Got paid in crowns and scepters I didn't ask for and don't use. They're all in the vault."
The vault makes so much MORE sense now. He didn't collect these things. He got paid in them and had nowhere to put them and eventually needed a warehouse.
u/TinfoilTina: "Too heavy."
The Charlemagne crown. The crown of one of the most powerful rulers in European history. Too heavy. In the vault since 813. The man has had a headache about that crown for 1,200 years.
On Pope Rankings (the entry everyone was waiting for)
Fine. People keep finding references to this. I'll write it out properly.
These are personal opinions. Party skills ONLY. Not governance, not theology, not historical significance. Just: was this person good to be around at a social occasion. Separate categories.
Top five:
Leo I. Decisive, quick, completely unflappable under pressure. The man walked out to meet Attila the Hun with essentially no army and talked him into leaving through sheer presence and very good argument. I was not there for that specific meeting but I was nearby and I spoke to him afterward. He was not even particularly shaken. Remarkable person. Would have thrived anywhere, any era, any room.
John XXIII. Genuinely warm. Excellent laugh. The kind of person who makes you feel immediately comfortable, which is harder to do than it sounds when you're also the Pope. He also seemed to find the whole situation slightly funny, in a fond way, which I respect enormously. The job is absurd if you look at it directly. Most of them couldn't look at it directly. He could.
Current. Better conversationalist than he probably knows. Makes genuinely good coffee. Willing to be challenged on things, which is not universal in that job. We disagree about Shakespeare (he thinks the plays are more interesting than the source material, I told him he's wrong, he said he'd consider the evidence, which is not the same as agreeing but is more than most people give me). Top five. Earned it.
Clement VII. Administratively a disaster - the Sack of Rome happened on his watch and that's a hard thing to come back from. But personally? Charming. Good wine cellar. Handled the aftermath with more grace than most people would have. Easy to talk to once you got past the enormous amount of things going badly.
John XII. I know. I KNOW. The governance was objectively catastrophic. He became Pope at nineteen and treated the Vatican like a personal venue. Contemporary sources were not kind. But: the man knew how to be at a party. These are different skills. Not listing them together. I have separated the categories for a reason.
Honorable mention: Gregory I. Organized. Efficient. Reformed the entire liturgical calendar. Personally, not a lot of fun. 6/10. I respect the work ethic.
NOT a party person: Innocent III. Brilliant administrator. Called the Fourth Crusade. Technically the Crusade then went completely off course and sacked Constantinople instead of the Holy Land, which was not the plan, and he was furious about it, but still. Not invited to my hypothetical party. Not on the list.
The current Pope has been informed he placed third. He texted me that he feels the coffee comment undersells the blend. He is correct. It is an excellent Ethiopian single-origin. I should have been more specific.
NOT FOR PUBLIC CONSUMPTION. ESPECIALLY THIS PAGE.
[3.1 million upvotes]
u/DeepStateDigger: HE TEXTED THE POPE ABOUT THE COFFEE
THE POPE TEXTED BACK ABOUT THE BLEND
THEY HAVE EACH OTHER'S NUMBERS
u/Vatican_Definitely_Not_Watching: His Holiness has reviewed this entry and would like it noted that the blend is a single-origin Ethiopian roast from a small cooperative in the Yirgacheffe region and the flavor profile is distinctly floral with notes of bergamot.
He is pleased to be third.
He maintains his position on Shakespeare.
u/DeepStateDigger: IS THIS A VERIFIED ACCOUNT
u/Vatican_Definitely_Not_Watching: No.
(Yes.)
u/ChurchHistoryProf: John XII in the top five for party skills with full acknowledgment that his governance was catastrophic and a note that these are separate categories.
This is the most historically nuanced, legally careful, and genuinely funny piece of papal analysis ever written. I have a PhD in ecclesiastical history. Perseus has beaten me. In a private notebook. That wasn't supposed to be public.
u/HistoricallyJustified: "I have separated the categories for a reason."
He made a methodology note. In his party skills ranking. For a private journal.
The precision of this man.