Remarks:
Arrius Calpurnius Piso=Caesennius Paetus=Annius Varus, great grandfather of Marcus Aurelius,=Arrius Antoninus. proconsul uner Vespasoan=Flavius Josephus. Plavius Josephus was a penname of Arrius Piso. Vespasian relied upon Piso because he was grandson of his own brother - brother, T. Flavius Sabinus, had married Arria Sr. (i.e., Arria the Elder), who was Piso’s maternal grandmother. Piso’s identity as thus also a Flavian is decipherable from the appearance in the Flavian family line of L. Caesennius Paetus (Townend, Gavin, "Some Flavian Connections," Journal of Roman Studies, LI. 54, 62, 1961). That was an alias (like Thrasea Paetus) of Piso’s father, L. Calpurnius Piso [ Note: we now know Arrius Piso’s father to have been Gaius Calpurnius Piso who was executed by Nero]. See page 20 supra, wherein Piso himself also is mentioned as a Caesennius Paetus. That is the true reason Piso used the literary pseudonym of Flavius; it was not because of his alleged - but untrue and hardly necessary - adoption by Emperor Flavius Vespasian. He was in fact (already) a Flavian."
Abelard Reuchlin;The True Authorship of the New Testament
In terms of Arrius Calpurnius Piso himself, he indeed made certain that his full and real name was never to be found anywhere that was obvious in history - therefore hiding his true identity from everyone but a small few.
To restate this, the name "Arrius Calpurnius Piso" is not found outright in ancient history. But, it can be deduced and therefore reconstructed, because it is found in parts or ‘chopped up’ here and there. It is a matter of putting all of the ‘parts’ together to get his true full name. Remember, this name was deliberately hidden.
When his true name and identity are discovered and known the rest starts to fall into place and the truth unravels. The easiest way to find that "Arrius Calpurnius Piso" is his real name is to find him as (C.) Caesennius Paetus when his father as Thrasea Paetus is found out to really be Gaius Calpurnius Piso, who was put to death (by order of suicide) by Nero in 65 CE. At that point, you know that he is the son of Gaius Calpurnius Piso, and that therefore the "Calpurnius Piso" part of his real/true name becomes known. From there one may deduce from information available in ancient history and in articles dealing with specifics of it that his firstname was "Arrius" as the masculine form of his mother’s name (Arria). You may well wish to note that the Jewish historic commentary tries to point this out with the "Pantera" riddle. This will be explained in more detail later on in this article. And one may also wish to note that Arrius Calpurnius Piso’s real name was not "Gaius Calpurnius Piso, Jr.", as he just assumes that as an alter or alias name for the specific purpose of indicating that he was the son of Gaius Calpurnius Piso. His true name is the one that people in his family knew him as and called him by - and as we go on in our studies, it will become more and more apparent that this name was indeed "Arrius".
One of the best proofs for Flavius Josephus being the primary author of the Gospelsand the inventor of "Jesus" is simply the correlations that are found between the works of Flavius Josephus and the New Testament itself. Those correlations will be nade available to the public in the upcoming years.
It is quite fortunate for us that the Romans were not the only ones who were leaving us records and information of persons and history in those times. The Jews (Pharisees), whom Rome was at war with over this very issue likewise left us what informationthat they could within their particular circumstance. Like the Romans, they too used what we refer to as ‘royal language’ as they could not write about this openly either and had to resort to hints, riddles and clues as well. But now that we know just how to read that ‘royal language’, we can also read what they had written - just as they had wrote it and intended it to be read by those whom could do so.
Because of what this reveals, it demonstrates to us that history (especially ancient history) as we think we know it, did not happen in the way in which we had previously thought that it had and we must now expect that more and more evidence likewise will be found that is consistent with the way in which it DID happen.
What this also means is that because the ancient authors were in complete control of what kind of evidence (in terms of their literary creations) and how much of various facts and information that they would give to us, we more or less find ourselves at their virtual ‘mercy’ as far as just what evidence they chose to leave to us for the purpose of finding out the real truth of matters in ancient history. And this should be considered when one is expecting to find one type of evidence or another. But this also means that what WAS left was left to us in what may be called ‘near pristine’ condition as far as what we find in the original texts - and that is much better than what we had previously thought we had in terms of what texts and info we had from those times. What I mean by this is that they did not write about just anyone, all persons that they made mention of in history was a relative of theirs whether by use of an alias name or not. There were not a lot of different persons writing either, which makes identifying just who wrote what much easier for us.
The Piso family had a history of being ‘governors’ of Syria. That is to say in actuality, kings installed there by Rome. Syria was generally a region that was ruled over by the Pisos for many generations. As Caesennius Paetus, Arrius Piso was the governor of Syria (Ref. Flavius Josephus, Jewish War II, VII, 59, Whiston translation; and also "The True Authorship of the New Testament", by Abelard Reuchlin, pg. 20). Reuchlin says; Then Caesennius Paetus appears as governor of Syria, but because he is still Caesennius, he is still Josephus."