Who We Are: the History of the White Race

No people is morally and spiritually healthy unless it is imbued with a strong sense of its own identity. Essential to that sense of identity are an awareness and an understanding of all the qualities which the members of the people share in common.

It is doubly imperative that every man and woman who claims the privilege of membership in a community based on the bonds of common race and common culture knows and takes pride in his racial and cultural history, for in this history are all the elements which give his community its unique character and differentiate its members from all those who are not members.

When such knowledge and pride are lacking, a community is subject to a host of ills and cannot long endure. Solidarity and a sense of responsibility to the community give place to special-interest factionalism and alienation. A lack of a sense of identity blurs the distinction between compatriot and stranger, between friend and foe, and leaves the community prey to the greed or malice of aliens as well as of its own pathological members, who will grow mightily in numbers as loss of identity proceeds.

The National Alliance is still very small compared to the larger national-racial community of which it is a part, yet if it is to grow someday into a truly effective community of blood and spirit which can serve as a nucleus for the regeneration of the larger community, it must begin now the process of education which will later serve as a model for the re-education of our whole people. NATIONAL VANGUARD serves this purpose, and it is hoped that the series of articles entitled “Who We Are” which will appear in successive issues will contribute to its overall effectiveness in that direction.

Let us begin acquiring our understanding of who we are by going far, far back beyond our earliest historical records … back beyond man himself … back to … the Beginning.

In the Beginning was the Cosmos — and is and ever shall be. The Cosmos is the Whole, the All-encompassing. It comprises all things, material and spiritual. The blazing suns of the firmament; the formless gas between the stars; the silent, frozen mountain peaks of the moon; the rustling trees of earthly forests; the teeming creatures of the dark ocean depths; and man are parts of the Cosmos.

The Cosmos is ever-changing, ever-evolving, moving toward ever higher states of existence. Here on earth man partakes in this evolution, just as before man other living creatures partook in it, with each succeeding eon leading to higher and higher levels of order, of life, of self-awareness.

If we trace this evolution backward in time, following as best we can the scientific clues down through the eons; looking back toward more and more primitive forms of life — and even earlier, before the first biological life existed, before the earth itself had condensed, to a time when the only animate entity was the Whole itself, the only consciousness in the Cosmos its own immanent animus — we find ourselves approaching a singular set of conditions, in which temperature and density were everywhere much higher than now. In this early era neither stars nor planets had yet taken shape; matter did not yet exist in the forms with which we are familiar. The conditions which we can see when we look far enough backward in time were too extreme even for the existence of the neutrons, protons, and electrons which make up the material universe today; even time itself was ill-defined at the Beginning.

The Primordial Atom

We can look back some 15 billion years altogether, to a singular state of the Cosmos, when it existed as a primordial “atom” of infinite temperature and density. Beyond that singular state we cannot see, nor do we feel that it is even meaningful to ask what existed “before,” because, as already mentioned, time itself loses its familiar meaning as we probe deeper and deeper into that earliest era of evolution of the Cosmos.

That is a limiting situation which is not likely to change in the future, even as science enables us to make more and more refined and sophisticated observations, from which can be implied a more and more detailed and precise picture of the state of the Cosmos in the era just after the Beginning. But even today we can, with considerable confidence, draw a series of pictures of the early states of the Cosmos stretching back roughly 15 billion years, so long as we do not press too close to the Beginning.
Within the first million years of that 15 billion years — less than one ten-thousandth of the total interval — the Cosmos evolved very rapidly and changed a great deal, indeed. The primordial “atom” — the Cosmic fireball — had expanded and cooled to such an extent that all the types of particles with which we are familiar today could exist, and from the hot gases which these particles combined to form , the first stars were condensing.

The First Life

The evolution of the Cosmos has proceeded much more slowly since then, but a great deal has happened, nevertheless. Many of the earliest stars have evolved through their entire life cycles and returned their constituent matter to interstellar space, from which new generations of stars have been born and have, in their turn, died. This process of stellar evolution has gradually changed the makeup of the interstellar gas, enriching it more and more with heavy species of atoms.

From this enriched interstellar gas our own sun was born some five billion years ago, and the earth condensed from the same material at about the same time; the latest estimate of the earth’s age is around 4.6 billion years. Within a billion years of the earth’s formation, the first biological life appeared on its surface.

This earliest biological life — as distinguished from the more generalized “life” of the Cosmos — consisted merely of self-replicating molecules: complex aggregates of atoms which had, in the course of the inorganic evolution which preceded the first life, acquired the ability to organize the atoms and simpler molecules of their environment into replicas of themselves — i.e., the ability to “reproduce.”

As the process of organic evolution continued, new forms appeared — more complex, more highly organized forms than those preceding them. The process led from single, “living” molecules to the first creatures with a cellular structure, then from single-celled life to multi-celled forms. It led from the earliest forms of life in the primal seas to the amphibians to the reptiles to the birds and mammals — from trilobite to tyrannosaur to proto-tarsier — and, eventually, to man, who first appeared anywhere from one to three million years ago, depending upon where one arbitrarily draws the line between “man” and “ape-man.”

Homo erectus

The “men” of that distant era differed quite a bit from the members of any living race; they were merely the first creatures in a particular ape-to-man evolutionary line who exhibited certain characteristics which qualified them as members of genus Homo (man), rather than Pithecus (ape) or Pithecanthropus (ape-man). Among these characteristics were a more-or-less erect posture, the regular manufacture and use of tools, and cranial and dental features which were more manlike than those of the apes or the ape-men.

The oldest identifiable members of genus Homo are known to us today only through a few fragments of bone. By about 900,000 years ago, however, there lived on earth a species, Homo erectus, which left more plentiful remains and whose members are generally recognized as the immediate pre-human ancestors of today’s living races of man.

Until a few years ago the youngest fossil remains of H. erectus known were about 100,000 years old. It is now believed that H. erectus survived until as late as 10,000 years ago in isolated tropical areas. Long before that species became extinct, however, it had diversified into several different pre-human races, each of which evolved separately across the threshold between H. erectus and H. sapiens, the species to which all living human subspecies, or races, have been assigned by the taxonomists. And each of these major racial branches of H. sapiens has itself thrown out branchlets: the Nordic, Alpine, and Mediterranean subraces of the White (Caucasian, European) race, for example.

The Tree of Life

Later, we shall examine in detail the development of the White race over the last half-million years or so, paying particular attention to its branching away from the parent H. erectus stock and then its subsequent diversification. Before we concentrate our attention on our particular branch, however, we want to note several general characteristics of the Tree of Life.

The first thing to note is that it is branched. Man’s immediate progenitors were ape-like — as were, of course, the immediate progenitors of today’s apes. That means that the relationship between living apes and man is not a father-son relationship, but one between cousins — an obvious distinction, but one which has, nevertheless, been overlooked by a great many people since the notion gained popular currency that Charles Darwin had postulated that “man is descended from the monkeys.”

The Tree of Life branches and rebranches, with each branching marking the birth of a new species. This occurs whenever a portion of the population of an existing species becomes isolated from the rest of the population long enough for the genetic constitutions of the two groups to drift apart.

Hybridization

After a branching occurs there are several possibilities: one — or both — branches may terminate in extinction; a branch that does not terminate may continue to grow indefinitely without sending out any new shoots, although considerable evolutionary change may take place as the branch grows; or it may give birth to any number of other branches.

Also, divergent branches may occasionally recombine, in a rather untree-like manner. This last possibility may occur when two species, formerly isolated, are brought into contact, perhaps by a glacial or tectonic change which establishes a land bridge across a water barrier. If the species have not become too genetically disparate, hybridization may sometimes occur, although among nearly all animals there are strong built-in tendencies against this. (Contrary to popular misconception, the mere fact that two organisms belong to different species does not necessarily preclude their being able to mate and produce fertile offspring; although this seldom happens under natural conditions, there is a large number of pairs of species for which it can happen and has happened. The other side of the coin is that the mere fact of interfertility is, in itself, not a sufficient reason for classifying two types of organism — or two races — in the same species.)

The Unity of Life

The second outstanding characteristic of the Tree of Life to be noted is its unity. From a single trunk have grown all the myriad species, living and extinct, of the plant and animal kingdoms of this planet. No species exists apart from the others; none can claim an Immaculate Conception; all evolved from more primitive species. And a connection can be traced through the branches of the Tree between any two creatures, no matter how different, no matter how lowly the one and exalted the other.

Again, this is an obvious characteristic, but it is often ignored by those who would prefer to believe that man and the rest of the Cosmos are separate — in particular, by those who would wrench man’s own branch from the Tree of Life and make it a separate tree unto itself, governed by laws entirely different from those governing all other living things.

This vain attempt to create a special status for mankind finds among its staunchest boosters the racial egalitarians. These befuddled neo-humanists seem to believe that, by putting every featherless biped which can be squeezed into the Homo sapiens category on a high plateau above the rest of the animal kingdom, and by anointing those thereon with “human dignity” — a quality which sets them utterly apart from all creatures not so anointed — they are promoting the cause of “human brotherhood.”

The Evolutionary Continuum

Others who shun the fact of Nature’s unity do so for reasons of piety. Unless they can imagine a great gulf between man and non-man, they run into insurmountable difficulties in deciding which creatures are entitled to immortal souls and which are not.

Closely related to the unity of the Tree of Life is its continuity. Nature does not jump suddenly from one species to another. Although the rate of evolutionary change varies greatly from branch to branch and from time to time, it is always evolutionary, never revolutionary. Between any two life forms in the Tree, there are always intermediate forms (although, at a particular time, some of the intermediate forms may be extinct rather than living).

Thus, every living creature, including man, can trace his antecedents back through a 15-billion-year continuum of evolutionary states, in skin color, in intelligence, in facial features, in skull shape, or in any other characteristic distinguishing two races, as if the existence of mongrels in some way implies that everyone is a mongrel.

But they are less enthusiastic about the continuity between man and his non-human ancestors, as well as about the gradations which can be seen in many anatomical features between man and his living non-human cousins, because these cast a new light on human racial differences — a light which reveals the fact that Nature’s hierarchical principle, the progression from primitive to advanced forms, operates within H. sapiens as well as without. Some races of man are then seen all too clearly as intermediate forms between higher human types and non-human types.

Meaning of “Species”

One further digression is worthwhile, before we look in detail at our ancestors. Let us, in view of the preceding observations on the general characteristics of the Tree of Life, consider just what the designations “species” and “race” (subspecies) actually mean.

Historically both terms — especially race — have had many different meanings. Today a species is usually defined, very roughly, by zoologists as an interbreeding group of animals; and a race, or subspecies, as a morphologically distinct subdivision of a species.

An attempt at a more precise definition of species has been made by Theodosius Dobzhansky. According to Professor Dobzhansky (who is an unabashed propagandist for the cause of racial equality), two groups of sexually reproducing animals constitute two separate species when the groups “are reproductively isolated to the extent that the exchange of genes between them is absent or so slow that the genetic differences are not diminished or swamped.”

What does Dobzhansky’s definition really mean? Certainly, where the exchange of genes between two groups of animals is physically impossible, because no offspring or only infertile offspring can result from a mating, the groups are specifically distinct. Thus, for example, donkeys (Equus asinus) and horses (Equus caballus) belong to separate species, because their mongrel offspring, mules, are always sterile.

Nature Abhors a Mongrel

But, as already noted, there are a great many instances of pairs of groups which can interbreed with each other but, under natural conditions, either do not or do so relatively seldom, so that their genetic differences are not “swamped.” Such groups are customarily regarded as specifically distinct, in accord with Dobzhansky’s criterion.

One example of such a pair is provided by two very similar species of gazelles, Grant’s gazelle and Thomson’s gazelle. The two intermingle with each other in the wild, and they are interfertile, but they do not mate with each other. Although the morphological difference between the two species is slight — much less than the difference between a Nordic and a Mediterranean, not to mention the difference between a White and a Negro — the gazelles are able to recognize this difference (probably with their sense of smell), and mating is psychologically blocked.

Many other examples — not only among mammals, but also among birds, fish, reptiles, amphibians, and even invertebrates — could be given of pairs of species, potentially interfertile, whose separateness is maintained only by an instinctive, psychological barrier against miscegenation. This general revulsion in Nature against miscegenation has long been recognized by zoologists, and more than a century ago the distinguished French surgeon and naturalist Paul Broca wrote: “Animals that live in complete liberty and only obey their natural instincts seek ordinarily for their amours other animals that are altogether similar to their own kind, and mate almost always with their own species.”

Psychological Isolation

Were this not almost universally the case, the evolutionary process would be vastly less efficient than it is at producing new species. It would depend entirely upon geographical isolation. In fact, however, psychological isolation has played at least as important a role in preventing the recombination of incipiently divergent branches of the Tree of Life.

It should be noted, however, that psychological isolation often breaks down when animals are not in their natural state. In captivity or under domestication many of an animal’s built-in behavior patterns become inoperative or distorted, and this is especially true where mating is concerned. When confined, bulls may mount mares, roosters will sometimes attempt to copulate with ducks, and baboons have been known to lust after women.

The domestic dog, Canis familiaris, provides the classic example of the breakdown of the psychological inhibition against miscegenation, where races as divergent as the St. Bernard and the Chihuahua are not only interfertile but are willing to mate. Dogs have been domesticated and bred by men for at least the last 10,000 years, and constant interbreeding has prevented their separation into distinct species, despite the enormous range of somatic and psychic traits they display — a range approached by no other mammal except man.

Domesticated Man

Man, of course, is the most domesticated of all animals, and it is not surprising that his natural inhibition against miscegenation has become confused — even without the perverse efforts of the egalitarians to promote racial mixing. We should instead wonder at the degree to which this healthiest and most essential of our natural sexual predispositions has survived centuries of a most unnatural lifestyle.

There is a great deal of evidence, historical and otherwise, indicating that in the past the White race, at least, felt a much stronger inhibition against miscegenation than it does today. As urbanization has spread, so has racial mixing. The evidence also indicates a marked variation from race to race in the strength of the inhibition against miscegenation — a variation which, to be sure, may only reflect the effect of different racial lifestyles.

Aryans, Dorians, Goths

The ancient Nordic tribes of Europe universally abhorred racial mixing. The Aryans who conquered India more than 35 centuries ago imposed a strict ban on any sexual contact with the non-White indigenous population, a ban which survives in vestigial form to this day as the Indian caste system. The Dorians who conquered the Peloponnessus at about the same time — and were later known by the name of their chief city, Sparta — likewise forbade miscegenation with the non-Nordic Pelasgian natives. And the Goths who conquered Italy 2,000 years later refrained from mating with the mixed, partly Mediterranean population they encountered there.

In every case the inhibition eventually broke down, as the hardy conquerors settled into a new and softer lifestyle and departed more and more from their ancestral ways. As warriors, hunters, farmers, and craftsmen living in close communion with Nature in their northern fields and forests, their sexual instincts remained sound. But when they became city dwellers and merchants and clerks and administrators, their instincts became blunted, and this fact was reflected in gradually changing sexual mores.

Latin Miscegenation

In other races and subraces the pattern has been different. The Mediterranean peoples of southern Europe have generally shown less disinclination to mate with other races than have Nordics. One can see the effect of this difference most strikingly in the different colonial histories of North America and South America. The early colonists who settled the former were predominantly Nordic, and racial mixing with the indigenous Indians was minimal. But the latter continent was settled by Portuguese and Spaniards, both of whom had a heavy Mediterranean admixture. They interbred widely with the indigenous population, as well as with the Black slaves they imported from Africa.

The same difference can be noticed in the European colonization of Africa. The Portuguese interbred with the Blacks in their colonies of Angola and Mozambique, while the Dutch and English in South Africa and Rhodesia kept their blood largely untainted. Such mongrels as the Nordic settlers did produce were not absorbed into the White population, whereas those produced by the Portuguese were.

It is possible that this Nordic-Mediterranean difference can be partly accounted for in the two different religions the two races of colonizers brought with them to their colonies. The present pattern in America does not support such an accounting, however. Irish, Italian, Polish and other predominantly Catholic ethnic groups are displaying better instincts, on the whole, than the Protestant majority.

It must be remembered, of course, that both Catholicism and Protestantism have undergone significant changes in the last few decades, and that, with the exception of some Italian elements (primarily from southern Italy) and a few other elements from the Mediterranean area, most (White) Catholic ethnic groups in the United States today are very similar racially to the Protestant majority. Certainly, they are far less Mediterranean in their makeup than the Spanish and Portuguese colonizers of South America and Africa were.

Anything that Moves

In the case of the Negroes, their notorious lack of sexual discrimination clearly cannot be blamed on their religion. It is true that a civilized environment is even more unnatural for them than it is for Whites, but even in controlled situations, such as prisons, there remains a strong racial difference in behavior between Blacks and Whites. As anyone unfortunate enough to have spent any time in close confinement with them can testify, Blacks will attempt to copulate with anything that moves.

We can now see that the lumping together of Negroes, Whites, Mongolians, Australian aborigines, and others in a single species, H. sapiens, can be justified only because, under the unnatural conditions in which they live, they often interbreed with one another. Under natural conditions, where psychological barriers against miscegenation become more fully operative and the various races no longer form a single, interbreeding group, they must be classified as separate species.

Furthermore, if any one race achieves a sense of identity sufficient to make feasible the full reactivation of its natural loathing of racial mixing, whether by means of education or some other form of psychological conditioning capable of overcoming the instinct-blunting effects of an unnatural lifestyle, it thereby achieves for itself the status of a separate species.

Thus, the basis on which the concept of a single human species rests is quite tenuous. It is not a physical basis — the morphological differences among the races are more than sufficient to qualify them as separate species — but a psychological basis, and a basis in abnormal psychology, at that.

Brother to the Wolf

It is important to understand this, because with understanding comes freedom from the superstition of “human brotherhood.” We are one with the Cosmos and are, in a sense, brothers to every living thing: to the ameba, to the wolf, to the chimpanzee, and to the Negro. But this sense of brotherhood does not paralyze our will when we are faced with the necessity of taking certain actions — whether game control or pest control or disease control — relative to other species in order to insure the continued progress of our own. And so it must be with the Negro.

The enlightened attitude for which we should strive is one which places more emphasis than has been customary in the past on the unity of life, and which consequently values non-human life — whether redwood trees or whales — more than it does a minor human convenience or a temporary economic advantage, but which at the same time maintains a proper perspective toward all forms of life, whether closely related to us or not. No neo-humanistic superstition must allow any species — or sub-species, if one accepts the all-inclusive definition of H. sapiens now in vogue — to stand between us and our race’s evolutionary destiny.

Tracing Our Roots

Tracing modern man’s roots back to his pre-human ancestors is a fascinating task, but also a very difficult task, and a thankless one in terms of material reward; government and institutional support for paleontological research has always been scanty. Nevertheless, a number of exceptional men have devoted their lives to it, and the last century has seen an enormous increase in our knowledge of our roots. That knowledge, however, remains far from complete; in some areas it is sketchy, indeed.

Briefly, what we know is this: the first, primitive primates (the order of animals to which all monkeys, apes, and men belong) branched off from the rest of the mammals (warm-blooded, fur-bearing animals which bear their young alive and suckle them) in the neighborhood of 70 to 80 million years ago. These early primates (most nearly represented among living species of primates by the prosimians: tarsiers, lemurs, lorises, and tree shrews) differed from other mammals primarily in having somewhat larger brains (relative to their overall size), prehensile (grasping) hands and feet with nails rather than claws, and stereoscopic vision.

The primates continued to evolve and branch over the next few tens of millions of years. Some of the branches evolved quite slowly and others much more rapidly. About 25 million years ago one of the faster-evolving branches split in two. From one of those branches grew the family of apes, whose modern descendants are the gibbon, the orangutan, the gorilla, and the chimpanzee.

The Family of Man

From the other branch grew the family of man. This branch itself rebranched a number of times, but its only living descendants are those creatures today classified as Homo sapiens; the other branchings died out. Thus, man’s line of evolution separated from that of all the other animals alive today some 25 million years ago.

The ancestral apes of that day are exemplified by the species Dryopithecus africanus, otherwise known as Proconsul, an animal about the size of a modern chimpanzee. For a number of years in the latter half of the 19th century and the early part of this century, there was a search for Proconsul’s contemporary on man’s side of the fork — a contemporary which came to be popularly called “the missing link.”

In 1891 the Dutch naturalist Eugene Dubois discovered a fossil skull in Java he believed to be that of the missing link. He named the species represented by his skull Pithecanthropus erectus (erect ape-man). It was later decided that the skull belonged to a Javanese variation of Homo erectus, which came to be popularly known as Java Man.

From the ages of the geological strata where Dubois’s skull and similar ones were discovered, Java Man was found to have lived from 700,000 to 900,000 years ago.

More Links

Other fossil discoveries supplied other missing links in the chain stretching from H. erectus back nearly 25 million years to the time of Proconsul. One of the oldest of these links is the genus Ramapithecus, covering the span from 12 million years ago to about 15 million years ago. Another link is the genus Australopithecus, whose fossils range from something over four million to about 600,000 years old.

But as more and more fossils were found and dated, it became increasingly clear that reality was somewhat more complex than the searchers for various missing links had assumed. Links were being found not in a single evolutionary chain, but in several parallel chains.

Since 1960 the evidence has become overwhelming that for roughly the last three million years — the geologic epoch known as the Pleistocene — man’s family tree has looked rather like a hedge, with a confusing array of branches and twigs. This evolutionary proliferation has its origin in the unique environmental conditions which existed during the Pleistocene.

Ice Ages

For a great many millions of years — in particular, during 70 million years or so of primate evolution — the earth’s climate was warm and stable. Then, about three million years ago, a period of climatic instability set in. Global temperatures began oscillating, and these oscillations caused drastic changes in living conditions for animals in many parts of the world.

Associated with these temperature changes were the advance and retreat of huge ice sheets in the northern and southern temperate zones. After an initial two million years or so of relatively minor glacial periods, the Pleistocene temperature oscillations became more extreme, producing four major ice ages, beginning about 1.5 million years ago.

These four ice ages have been designated in chronological order by geologists as Guenz, Mindel, Riss, and Wuerm. The Wuerm glaciation began to recede about 15,000 years ago, in a general warming trend. At that time thick ice sheets covered much of North America, Europe, and Asia.

Actually, each major glacial period encompassed several global temperature oscillations, with the ice advancing and receding accordingly. During the recessions, which lasted from several thousand years to several tens of thousands of years, many areas which had been covered with ice became much warmer — some of them even warmer than today.

Change and Adaptation

The important thing, from the evolutionary standpoint, about the Pleistocene is not so much that it brought ice and cold weather to large areas of the earth, but that it brought change: a continuing series of drastic climatic changes from hot to cold, from wet to dry, and back again. Each change forced the animal and plant life exposed to it to adapt or to become extinct. The continuing pressure for rapid adaptation provided an enormous stimulus to the process of evolution.

It should be noted that the climatic changes of t????????????????????????????????????????????????? ?????????????????????????????????????????????????? ?????????????????????????????barrier. If the species have not become too genetically disparate, hybridization may sometimes occur, although among nearly all ?????????????????????????????????????????????????? ?????????????????????????????????????????????????? ????????????????????????????????????????4????????? ?????????????????????????????4???????????????????? ?????????????????????????????????????????????????? ??????Many Pre-human Branches

Now we can see the difficulty of the paleontologists’ task. They would dig up a series of fossils covering a time span during which they could see evolutionary changes in a species of ape-man. Then they would find another fossil contemporary with one in their series, but substantially more advanced. The new fossil wrecked their nice picture of a simple progression of evolutionary stages and forced them to the realization that at some point in time the species whose progress they were following had begun diverging, part of it evolving much more rapidly than the remainder. This was something which happened repeatedly throughout the Pleistocene.

In particular, it happened to the Australopithecines. The older Australopithecines, four to five million years old, were clearly ancestral to man. But the later Australopithecines, only a million years old, were not, because a branching had taken place. The slower-evolving branch of the Australopithecine line eventually died out, but the faster-evolving branch gave rise to Homo erectus.

And this was even more so the story of Homo erectus, our direct ancestor. His fossils date from about 900,000 years ago (the end of the Guenz glaciation) to about 100,000 years ago (the beginning of the Wuerm glaciation), but not all the members of H. erectus who lived during that 800,000-year period are ancestral to all living men. As we shall see in the next installment in this series, H. erectus gave rise to several branches at different times. Some of these branches became extinct, and others gave rise to the various living races of man.

ILLUSTRATIONS

a) THE AMOEBA, a single-celled animal, is near the bottom of Nature’s animal hierarchy. It has an ancient lineage, however; single-celled animals have flourished, on earth for more than three billion years.

b) THE TRILOBITE, which exists only in fossil form today, was an arthropod (jointed-legged animal) which crawled on ancient seabeds half a billion years ago and flourished for 300 million years before becoming extinct.

c) THE TYRANNOSAUR, a 50-foot-long, carnivorous reptile, terrorized the earth 100 million years ago.

d) THE TARSIER is a prosimian, the most primitive group of living primates (the order of animals to which man belongs). The first primates, 70 million years ago, more closely resembled today’s prosimians than any other living primates.

e) THE OLD VIEW of Nature’s hierarchy (left) saw all the subspecies of H. sapiens grouped together far above other animals. The modern view (right) still sees the races of man as more advanced than any non-human species, but the distance is not as great, and the races of man are also ordered hierarchically.

Negro of Africa / Orangutan of Borneo
IF WE ACCEPT the animal on the left as an “equal,” why not also the animal on the right? Where are we to draw the line as to which creatures are entitled to civil rights — and which we are willing to breed with? If we do not have the courage to draw the line high enough, our race will sink back into the mass and perish.

EVERY DEFINITION man has used to set himself off from the rest of Nature has broken down. He is not the only animal which uses tools, nor which makes tools. He is not the only conceptual thinker, nor the only animal capable of learning a language. Chimpanzees can do all these things. The tool-making and tool-using chimp in this photograph has carefully selected a strong, straight branch and stripped the bark and side shoots from it, and she is using it to extract edible insects from an anthill. Chimps also make crude sponges, by crumpling a mass of leaves, and use them to sop up potable rain water from otherwise inaccessible crannies in the crotches of trees. They have .developed their tool-making and tool-using abilities on their own. Domesticated chimps have been taught to communicate with their human keepers, using both sign language and hieroglyphics. Some, such as the famous Washoe, have learned vocabularies of more than 200 words and can express abstract concepts with them. Man, of course, can make more sophisticated tools than chimpanzees can, and he has a much greater facility with language than they do. No chimp has ever invented the wheel or devised an alphabet of his own — but neither has any Negro. Chimpanzee, Negro, White man: the difference is one of degree.

PROCONSUL, who lived 25 million years ago, was the ancestor of today’s apes. When the creature with this skull was alive, his line of evolution had just separated from man’s.

JAVA MAN lived from 700,000 to 900,000 years ago. He was an early form of H. erectus.

Last month we traced our race’s lineage through some 15 billion years of evolutionary development, from the time of the undifferentiated Cosmos, just after the Beginning, to the early Pleistocene. The Pleistocene, that epoch of drastic and repeated climatic change which greatly accelerated the pace of evolution in the earth’s temperate zones, began about 3.5 million years ago and saw two of the important evolutionary developments we will consider in this series: the transition of the proto-European root stock from Homo erectus to Homo sapiens and the diversification of the European race into the subraces which exist today.

For one other important development, however — the beginning of the divergence of the various prehuman evolutionary lines leading to today’s major races — we must push back a bit further, into the dimly remote Pliocene epoch. (In general, in this series we will not confuse matters by introducing the specialized jargon of the paleontologists and geologists — Pliocene, Miocene, Oligocene, etc. except where it is especially helpful. In particular we will try to keep the chronology simple, using absolute dates whenever possible, rather than the names of the various eras, periods, and epochs, which are defined in terms of the geologic deposits characterizing them. Much of the older writing on this subject uses dates differing substantially from those in the newer writing, because of earlier errors and uncertainties in assigning absolute dates to the various geologic deposits. The beginning of the Pleistocene epoch — whose Greek roots simply mean “most recent” — for example, was formerly dated at about one million years ago, and has only recently been extended another 2.5 million years. The Pliocene — meaning ,’more recent” — was the epoch extending from the beginning of the Pleistocene back to about 12 million years ago.)

The Antiquity of the Races

The present state of our knowledge does not allow us to fix with any degree of certainty the earliest time at which there were no racial differences among the ancestors of the various living subspecies of man. We do know, however, that human racial differences precede Homo sapiens; i.e., that the divergence into the various living races began at the prehuman level.

Even the oldest H. erectus fossils which have been found can be assigned to various racial categories, e.g., pre-European, pre-Mongoloid, etc. And even among the Australopithecines, from which H. erectus evolved, there are clearly discernible racial differences foreshadowing today’s living races.

The racial trail becomes very difficult to follow back beyond about three million years, and the best guess that can be made at this time is that to find a common ancestor for all of the living subspecies of H. sapiens we would have to go back into the late Pliocene epoch, somewhere around four or five million years ago.

Separate Development

Thus, evolution has proceeded separately along several different lines from subman to man, with each line crossing that evolutionary threshold separately — and at a different time. The profound physical and psychical differences which can be observed today among the various races of man — between Whites and Blacks, for example — have been accumulating for a period of several million years (several hundred thousand generations) and were also present, to a lesser degree, among the prehuman ancestors of those races.

The separate development of the races throughout the Pleistocene is now a well-established fact, but for a long time egalitarian prejudices blinded many people, who preferred to believe that racial differences were only a few thousand years old. There are still a number of charlatans, in fact, promoting the “hat rack” theory of human evolution, which would have all the modern races sprouting from the top of a single line of human development in recent times. They believe that they can minimize racial differences by minimizing their antiquity.

It is worthwhile, therefore, taking a brief look at the evidence establishing the great antiquity of racial differences, before we focus our attention almost exclusively on our own line of development.

The Physical Evidence

The first Homo erectus fossil discovered was a skull on the island of Java, in 1891. It was subsequently determined that the creature to whom the skull had belonged had lived about 700,000 years ago. He came to be known as Java Man.
In 1929 another fossil H. erectus skull was discovered, this time at Choukoutien, in northern China, near Peking. Its owner, Peking Man, also lived about 700,000 years ago.

In the 1960’s paleontologists began excavating a prehistoric site at Vertesszoelloes, a Hungarian village about 30 miles from Budapest. Two fairly complete fossil skulls have been found there and have been dated at about 700,000 years old.

Although the skulls of Java Man, Peking Man, and Vertesszoelloes Man are all approximately the same age, they differ markedly from one another in a number of respects. The cranial capacity (brain size) of Java Man, for example, was 850 cubic centimeters, while Peking Man had a cranial capacity of 1150 cubic centimeters — more than one-third larger. And Vertesszoelloes Man had a cranial capacity of 1475 cubic centimeters — practically as large as that of a modern European, and larger than that of living Negroes and Australian aborigines.

Java Man, Peking Man, and Vertesszoelloes Man also differed from one another in their teeth, facial structures, and shapes of their cranial vaults. The individual peculiarities displayed by the fossils can be linked to peculiarities which distinguish certain modern races.

As just one example, Peking Man’s fossils exhibit a dental peculiarity known as shoveling, a characteristic deformation of the incisors. The same dental peculiarity is found in most living Mongoloids, but it is extremely rare in other living races.

Pattern Confirmed

Thus, paleontologists have been able to identify Java Man as a predecessor of the living Australoids (Australian aborigines); Peking Man as an early, prehuman ancestor of the modern Chinese and related Mongoloid peoples; and Vertesszoelloes Man as a predecessor of the modern Europeans.

Many other fossils, some older and some more recent than those cited above, have confirmed the pattern. Carleton S. Coon, in his monumental work, The Origin of Races, assembled virtually all the evidence available up to 1962 and conclusively demolished the egalitarians’ “hat rack” theory of human evolution. Dr. Coon traced separate developmental lines for Europeans, Australoids, Negroes, Mongoloids, and Capoids (Bushmen) back to the middle Pleistocene, although his absolute time scale has since been corrected.

The Importance of Winter

When one studies the series of fossils in the various races’ lines of development, one is struck by the markedly different rates of evolution which are apparent. The general rule is that those races which evolved in the earth’s temperate zones did so more rapidly than those in the tropics.

The reasons were, first, the much sharper seasonal changes in the temperate zones than in the tropics; and, second, the much more drastic climatic changes which occurred in the temperate zones as the great ice sheets advanced and retreated repeatedly throughout the Pleistocene epoch.

Both types of change exerted strong selective pressure, the seasonal changes by requiring foresight and resourcefulness in preparing for the winter, and the climatic changes by eliminating life forms which could not adapt to long-term shifts in temperature and humidity.

Thus, for fossils of any given age, the temperate-zone European and Mongoloid lines will show a higher state of development than will the tropical Negroid and Australoid lines.

Which Way Is Up?

We might consider for a moment what we mean by a “higher” state of development. There is a natural tendency to think of man as more highly evolved than the living apes, of primates as more highly evolved than other mammals, of mammals as more highly evolved than fish, and so on. This tendency can sometimes be a bit misleading.

Since the ancestral lines of man and the apes split, some 25 million years ago, both have been evolving for exactly the same length of time, and both lines have undergone substantial changes. Those changes, however, have been in different directions — the apes’ line toward a better adaptation to one mode of existence and man’s line toward another. How are we justified in saying man’s direction of evolution has been more nearly “upward” than that of the apes?

Defining a Criterion

In attempting to answer this question we should note that there is no problem at all in saying a particular specimen is further evolved than another with regard to some specified characteristic. That is, we can pick any characteristic we want — cranial capacity, tooth size, degree of prognathism (projection of the lower portion of the face), or what have you — which changes with time along two or more ancestral lines of evolution; we can note the direction of change with time; and we can then pick contemporaneous specimens from two of the lines and note which line was further evolved at that time in the specified characteristic than the other.

If we then pick a second characteristic, we may find that, at the time in question, the line which was further evolved in the first characteristic may be less evolved in the second. Thus, at present, it is clear that apes are better brachiators, while man is a better cerebrator; likewise, Negroes are better sprinters, and Whites are better thinkers.

We can only speak of higher and lower grades of evolution if we pick a particular characteristic and a direction of change of that characteristic which we define as “upward.” The characteristic which we will always have in mind for this purpose is consciousness, and the direction of change is that of the Cosmos as a whole, namely, toward more and more fully developed states of consciousness.

Subman and Higher Man

Thus, from this point of view, we are justified in saying that man’s line of evolution turned generally upward when it separated from the apes’ line some 25 million years ago. And we are justified in referring to an earlier breed of manlike creatures with a less-developed sense of consciousness than we have as submen, just as we can correctly refer to a new breed with a more fully developed sense of consciousness as higher men.

Likewise, we can order the living races of man as to evolutionary grade.

In order to assign evolutionary grades to fossils, however, we must choose measurable characteristics which can be related to the level of consciousness. Characteristics of this sort which have been used are brain size, the shape of the cranial vault, tooth size, and the ratio of brain size to tooth size.

The use of brain size is obvious. The other three characteristics, however, are also related to the same developmental trend leading from small-brained, large-jawed skulls to large-brained skulls with smaller jaws and teeth. This trend progressively de-emphasized the lower face, with its biting and feeding functions, and emphasized the cranial vault, the seat of consciousness. Thus, as brains increased in size, teeth tended to shrink and prognathism to decrease simultaneously.

It is useful to have all these characteristics as criteria, because fossil skulls are often incomplete or badly damaged. Sometimes — as in the case of Heidelberg Man — only jaws and teeth have been found, and an estimate of evolutionary grade based on brain size alone is impossible.

In addition to the characteristics of the fossils themselves, cultural evidence is also used in judging evolutionary grade: the quality and diversity of the tools found with the fossils, indications of the use or non-use of fire, etc.

The First Human Beings

As we follow the lines of development for the various races through the Pleistocene, we find them reaching different evolutionary grades at different times. One grade of some interest is that at the erectus-sapiens threshold.

Vertesszoelloes Man had already crossed this threshold 700,000 years ago. The pre-Mongoloids crossed it approximately 150,000 years ago. And the predecessors of the modern Negroes crossed it less than 30,000 years ago.

The oldest hominid remains thus far unearthed in Europe are a massive lower jaw, with its teeth, found in 1907 in the German village of Mauer, six miles southeast of Heidelberg. The jaw, belonging to a creature known as Heidelberg Man, is 900,000 years old.

No artifacts were found with Heidelberg Man’s scanty remains, and it has not been possible to assign him with much certainty to a particular evolutionary grade, although it is generally considered that he was an advanced Homo erectus — perhaps just at the erectus-sapiens threshold.

The European Line of Descent

We do not know what the paleontologists may turn up later in Europe, but at this time we must look to Africa for older hominid fossils which may lie on the European line of descent. There we find the fossils of several races of A????????????????????????????????????????????????? ?????????????????????????????????????????????????? ????????????????????????????? ? ü ? ü ? ü ? ü ? ü ? ü ? ü ? ü ? ü `????????????????????????????????????????????????? ?????????????????????????????????????????????????? ???????????????????????????????hers to every living thing: to the ameba, to the wolf, to the chimpanzee, and to the Negro. But this sense of brotherhood does nulate at this time, however.

Returning to Europe, we can tentatively trace the European line through a period of three-quarters of a million years of evolution, all of it above the erectus-sapiens threshold. In the line of descent (ascent would be a more appropriate word, from the evolutionary viewpoint) from Vertesszoelloes Man, we have specimens from Swanscombe, in England, and Steinheim, in Germany, both about 500,000 years old. Then there are a number of fossil remains, all around 150,000 years old, scattered across Europe: Fontechevade, in France; Saccopastore, just outside Rome; Ehringsdorf, in Germany; Ganovce, in Slovakia; Krapina, in Croatia.

Neanderthal and Cro-Magnon

About 100,000 years ago, as Europe entered an intensely cold period of heavy glaciation, a type of Homo sapiens which differed in some respects from both earlier and later populations, appeared. This type has been named Neanderthal Man, after the river valley in Germany where his first fossil remains were unearthed, in 1856.

Neanderthal Man was more prognathous, had heavier brow ridges, and also displayed other skeletal features regarded as more primitive than his immediate predecessors. But his brain was not only larger than that of his predecessors, it was larger than that of modern Europeans.

About 30,000 years ago the Neanderthal populations were replaced with a type of man which was essentially modern in all respects. He did not display Neanderthal Man’s prognathism or heavy brow ridges, but his brain was equally large — about 80 cubic centimeters larger than that of today’s Whites. He has been named Cro-Magnon Man, after the site in the Dordogne region of France where his fossil remains were first excavated by scientists, in 1868.

Since Vertesszoelloes Man

As judged by the physical characteristics of their fossils, Europeans have not changed spectacularly in evolutionary grade during the last three-quarters of a million years. The earliest sapiens specimens we have found, at Vertesszoelloes, already had brains of essentially modern size , although 600,000 years later the Neanderthals had brains about 100 cubic centimeters larger.

There are reasons for believing that, considering size alone, brain evolution leveled off shortly above the erectus-sapiens threshold. The modern Mongoloids, for example, have brains as large as those of modern Europeans(1500 cubic centimeters), but their ancestors’ brains were substantially smaller than those of our ancestors. We crossed the erectus-sapiens threshold 600,000 years before they did, but they have been catching up with us since then. The Negroes and the Australian aborigines, who have just crossed that threshold, of course, still have brains substantially smaller than ours (1350 and 1300 cubic centimeters, respectively).

Cultural Evidence

There are other ways in which brains have evolved besides increasing in absolute size. We can compare brain structures between modern Whites and modern Negroes, for example, and note the morphological differences: Whites have more highly developed frontal lobes, an increased area of the cerebral hemispheres due to folding and fissuring, and larger associative areas.

One cannot make such comparisons directly among fossils, of course, because only bone has survived. We do have some clues, however. The patterns of certain brain arteries are visible as indentations on the interior surfaces of a few well-preserved fossil skulls, and one can categorize the patterns as primitive or advanced. Evidence of this sort is still too scanty to tell us a great deal.

We must turn to the cultural evidence in order to trace European man’s advance in consciousness more closely than we can from the evidence of his skeletal remains alone. That is the topic we will begin examining in the next installment in this series.

The Neanderthal Question

Because Neanderthal Man does not fit smoothly into a picture of continuous, unidirectional evolution between earlier and later European populations, paleontologists have suggested various explanations for his appearance in Europe 100,000 years ago and his disappearance 30,000 years ago. Of these explanations, only two are seriously considered today.

The first is that Neanderthal Man evolved from the preceding European population under the extreme selective pressure of the first Wuerm glaciation, developing his unique features as adaptations to the bitterly cold climate which prevailed during that period. Then, during the warmer period which followed, older features re-emerged, and the European population returned to the evolutionary track it had been following during the Riss-Wuerm interglacial period.

The second explanation is that Neanderthal Man was the product of racial mixture between Europeans and Mongoloids. Certainly, some of the Neanderthal peculiarities were suggestive of the Mongoloids of that day. Because the Mongoloids were already well adapted to cold weather, an admixture of their genes may have given a temporary survival advantage to a racially mixed population. As in the first explanation, when the climate later moderated the purely European genes re-emerged.

More Digging Needed

Which of these explanations — if either — is correct can only be decided after the paleontologists have gathered and carefully evaluated more fossil evidence.

Even more challenging than answering the Neanderthal question are the tasks of finding a few missing links between Heidelberg Man and Vertesszoelloes Man, and then of filling the gap between Heidelberg Man and the Olduvai Australopithecines. New evidence is coming to light practically every year, but a great deal more digging into the European past needs to be done before our knowledge of our identity can be completed.

ILLUSTRATIONS

a) AN ANCESTOR of European man? Designated Skull 1470, this fossil from Kenya is 2.8 million years old. With an estimated cranial capacity of 800 cubic centimeters, it belongs to a race greatly advanced over contemporary races of Australopithecines. It has been classified as Homo habilis, and some paleontologists suggest that it, rather than H. erectus, is the direct ancestor of the European race of H. sapiens.

b) EVOLUTION toward ever higher states of consciousness has resulted in a gradual shift of emphasis in the primate skull, over millions of years, from jaw to brain case. This tendency toward decreasing prognathism can be observed in fossils of different ages in the lines of descent of the various races of man. It can also be observed in the skulls of living animals, when they are ordered hierarchically according to evolutionary grade. The gorilla (left) exhibits a high degree of prognathism, with a facial angle of 60 degrees, while the European (right) is nearly orthognathous, with a facial angle of 82 degrees. The Negro (center), with a facial angle of 70 degrees, is intermediate in evolutionary grade between the gorilla and European man.

c) THE EVOLUTIONARY GRADES of the higher primates may be quantified in several different ways, e.g., by measuring the cranial capacity or the facial angle (see illustration on preceding page). The ratio of the sides of the basic rectangle of the mandible (lower jaw) may also be used. As one goes downward in evolutionary grade the mandible becomes progressively longer relative to its width, corresponding to increasing prognathism. For European man (A) the average length-to-breadth ratio of the mandible is 0.87. For the Negro (B) it is 0.97. For the chimpanzee (C), man’s closest living relative, it is 1.56. For the orangutan (D) it is 1.75. Note also the increasing extent of the bony shelf (“simian shelf”) directly behind the incisors as one proceeds downward in evolutionary grade from European man, in whom the shelf is virtually absent. The Negro has a moderately deep simian shelf, while in the chimpanzee and the orangutan the shelf extends well back along the mandible. (Drawings and data from Professor W.G. Kinzey, Dept. of Anthropology, Univ. of California at Davis; published in Nature 228, pp. 289-290, October 17, 1970.)

d) EVOLUTIONARY LINES for four of today’s living subspecies of H. sapiens show separate evolution across the erectus-sapiens threshold at different times. Fossil remains alone show relatively little change in evolutionary grade for European man in the last 700,000 years, but cultural evidence implies a continuing increase in his level of consciousness. Many more points on the lines of descent have been established by fossil remains than those indicated here.

e) NEANDERTHAL MAN, with certain primitive traits, may have been the mongrel offspring of the European and Mongoloid proto-races, or he may have been a temporary adaptation to the cold climate during Europe’s first Wuerm ice age.

f) CRO-MAGNON MAN’s earliest known fossils are about 30,000 years old, He was essentially modern in every respect and had a cranial capacity even larger than the average for Whites today.

g) RHODESIAN MAN, a race of H. erectus, was the ancestor of living Negroes. This flesh reconstruction of Rhodesian Man (left) is based on a fossil skull 30,000 years old. Today’s Negro (right) has lost most of Rhodesian Man’s bony eye ridges but retains his prognathism and relatively thick bones of the cranial vault.

h) THIS HOMO erectus group is an artist’s visualization of the prehuman species from which Homo sapiens is descended — although in the case of European man only one tentatively erectus fossil (the Heidelberg jaw) has been found. Our European ancestors passed through the erectus stage long before the other races did.

We have now looked at our ancestors’ physical remains — fossil skulls, teeth, and other bones — dating from prehuman times down to the appearance of Cro-Magnon Man, some 37,000 years ago. Judging from these somatic remains alone, we have only slight evidence of any increase in evolutionary grade during long portions of the three-quarters of a million years since the first appearance of Homo sapiens. Cro-Magnon Man’s remains indicate, if anything, a higher evolutionary grade than that of his present-day descendants. Only in the cultural evidence — tools, weapons, artistic creations, and the like — can we look for signs of really substantial evolutionary progress.

And it is highly questionable whether even the cultural evidence shows any increase in inherent human quality during the past 30,000 years, as we shall soon see. But, if we look back far enough, we can see in the remains of man’s tools and other artifacts unmistakable signs of changing evolutionary grade.

We have good reason for believing that our race has advanced not only in its cultural achievements but also in its inherent capacity for cultural achievement — and, by implication, in its level of consciousness — during the last million years, if not during the last 30,000.

Meaning of Culture

Culture has been defined in different ways by different anthropologists. We will define it here as all purposeful animal behavior which is learned rather than instinctual and which involves artifacts or symbols. Artifacts are extra-somatic objects modified as a part of or in furtherance of learned behavior; tools, weapons, and clothing are examples. Symbols may be spoken words, gestures, or ritualized or customary actions.

Specifically excluded from the realm of culture is behavior which is purely instinctual. Thus, the nest-building activity of birds, even though it involves artifacts, is not cultural. The hunting behavior of predatory mammals, even though it is at least partially learned by the young from their elders, is not, in most cases, considered cultural unless it involves the use of artifacts (weapons).

Nevertheless, culture is not an exclusively human attribute. Man’s prehuman ancestors possessed culture more than two million years before the attainment of the sapiens level, and some of man’s living non-human relatives possess it today.

Non-human Culture

It has already been mentioned in an earlier installment in this series that chimpanzees use and, to a limited extent, make tools. They use stones as missiles, handfuls of leaves as toilet paper or napkins, wads of chewed leaves as sponges, sticks as levers or clubs. They also modify twigs in order to suit them to specific purposes, usually as probes for extracting insects from their nests, but occasionally for other purposes as well.

This tool-using and tool-making behavior certainly has an instinctual component; chimpanzees are born with both the ability and the urge to pick up and manipulate objects. But careful observation of chimpanzees, both in captivity and in the wild, has established the fact that they learn the specific uses and modifications of objects by observing other chimpanzees. Thus, they have developed a tool-using and tool-making tradition which is passed from one generation to the next by non-genetic means: i.e., they have a culture.

No Basis for Distinction

Some anthropologists have attempted to qualitatively distinguish non-human cultures, such as those of chimpanzees and man’s earliest ancestors, from human cultures on the basis that the latter show progressive changes from one generation to the next, while the former remain essentially unchanged. There is, however, very little evidence for such a conclusion. Chimpanzee culture has been under close human observation for barely two chimpanzee generations, and while it is known that prehuman cultures remained virtually unchanged for thousands of generations, the same was true of early human cultures. It was also true of Australian aborigine, African Negro, and other non-White cultures even until recent times.

In this age of extraordinarily rapid cultural change, it may be difficult to realize that throughout man’s long prehistory cultural change was much slower. The rule has been for cultural evolution to keep pace with biological evolution rather than to race far ahead of it, as in this exceptional and troubled age.

Thus, we have no good reason for considering chimpanzee and prehuman cultures to be qualitatively different from primitive human cultures. They differ only in their level of development, and we can with good reason hope to learn much about the origins of our own culture by studying that of the chimpanzees and our prehuman ancestors — just as we have already gained valuable insights into the purely instinctual aspects of human behavior by studying animal behavior.

Prehuman Culture

The first tools used by man’s prehuman ancestors were the sticks and stones he could pick up around him and use without modification as clubs, projectiles, or hand-held hammers, just as chimpanzees use them today. The evidence of this earliest use of tools survives today in accumulations of hand-size stones found in association with the fossils of shattered animal bones at locations where stones of the type in question do not occur naturally. For example, when river-smoothed pebbles are found in caves several miles from the nearest stream, along with animal bones which have been smashed to get at the marrow, we may safely assume that some creature carried the pebbles there and used them as tools.

Sometime around three million years ago, pre-men learned that stones could be used for much more than hurling and pounding, if they were first modified. By striking stones together to fracture them, they produced sharp edges which could be used for cutting, scraping, or chopping. These first “pebble tools,” as they have been generically labeled, were very crude tools indeed, but for the creatures who produced them they represented an enormous advance in ability to cope with the environment.

The First Tool Makers

Who were these creatures? We are still not certain. In the Olduvai Gorge and other archeological sites in East Africa the fossil remains of Australopithecines have been found with pebble tools dated at nearly three million years old. The Australopithecines were omnivorous primates, not much larger than modern chimpanzees, who walked on two feet. Their cranial capacities averaged about 500 cubic centimeters, only 100 cubic centimeters larger than that of the modern chimpanzee. It is generally assumed that they made the pebble tools and hunted and ate the other animals whose remains are found with theirs.

But contemporary with these Australopithecines was a substantially more advanced primate, Homo habilis, whose fossils are much scarcer than those of the Australopithecines. Homo habilis, with a cranial capacity of 800 cubic centimeters, may have been the only maker of pebble tools three million years ago, and he may have hunted and eaten the Australopithecines whose remains have been found with these earliest artifacts. More evidence needs to be gathered before it can be decided with confidence whether the Australopithecines made pebble tools or were the victims of more advanced pebble tool makers.

Europe as Old as Africa

Pebble tools were also made in Europe three million years ago. A prehuman living site near Bugiulesti, in Romania, which is at least as old as the oldest sites in Olduvai Gorge, contains pebble tools and smashed animal bones — but no primate fossils. Whether the Bugiulesti site was inhabited by Australopithecines or Homo habilis or an early form of Homo erectus is unknown.

What is quite certain, however, is that from the time man’s prehuman ancestors developed the first rudiments of culture — long before the first pebble tools were made — their cultural, social, and biological evolution became inseparably intertwined, all three interacting strongly with one another,

One can gain some insight into the tightness of the cultural-social-biological interdependence which governed the development of man’s ancestors by considering only the social and biological implications of the first freeing of prehuman hands for tool using. As some early race of primates in man’s line of descent gradually ceased walking on all fours and became erect, using their forefeet as hands, their pelvises necessarily changed. The new shape of the pelvis accommodated bipedal locomotion better, but at the same time it reduced the available space for a birth canal.

Origin of the Family

Since the use of tools required a larger brain than before, and since the birth canal had become smaller, infants had to be born in a premature state, with a relatively long period of postnatal development and growth ahead of them. This meant a long period of incapacitation for mothers, while they nursed and cared for their helpless young. And this in turn required a prolonged dependence of the female on the male.

Thus, stable male-female pairing, with the male taking the role of hunter-provider and the female the role of mother-nurse, became established in our evolutionary line hundreds of thousands of generations ago. It is what is natural for our race, in that a predisposition for it is born with us. The foolish liberals who see it as the “oppression” of women and imagine that they can abolish it with a few acts of Congress or a Constitutional amendment have not the faintest understanding of what they are tampering with.

Sociobiology

Just as the nuclear family is much more than a purely cultural-social institution, so also were larger social groupings precultural in their origins. Only as a member of a band of his peers did the first inventor have a reasonable chance to transmit his invention to others, making it the collective property of the race, to be transmitted down the endless chain of generations.

Certain fundamental social institutions thus became genetically related to certain cultural developments, in that the race of primates which, at a precultural stage, developed social groupings and relationships favorable to the transmission of culture gained a survival advantage over races without such groupings and relationships. In this way an inborn predisposition toward certain general social forms became part of the race’s genetic heritage.

Another example of cultural-biological interdependence is given by man’s instinctual attachment to his weapons. For hundreds of thousands of generations of prehuman evolution — followed by some 30,000 generations of Homo sapiens — the ancestors of today’s men lived long enough to pass on their genes or not depending upon whether or not they had lethal weapons at hand, day and night, which they knew how to use effectively. As every gun lover knows, the modern American’s feelings for his firearms goes far deeper than reason, culture, or social tradition.

A similar explanation almost certainly holds for our racial predisposition toward tinkering with gadgets and hobbying with tools. Indeed, many men feel almost as deeply about their tools as they do about their weapons.

Ecological Revolution

So long as man’s ancestors were at the precultural level, they — like all other animals — were effectively confined to the habitat in which they had evolved and to which they were, therefore, biologically adapted. Without tools, weapons, clothing, fire, or artificial shelters, they had no control over their environment and were entirely at its mercy.

In the late Pliocene — four or five million years ago — the prehuman habitat was probably tropical savanna: grassland with scattered trees, intermediate between the open plains and the tropical forests. Outside such regions man’s ancestors could not survive, and the result was that most of the earth’s surface was uninhabited.

Then began what is known as the Ecological Revolution, with the first primate use of tools. Tool use gave man’s ancestors their first partial independence of their environment, allowing them to expand beyond their original habitat. Probably sometime in the early Pleistocene — perhaps three million years ago — the habitat of tool-using prehumans had expanded into the earth’s temperate regions, including southern and central Europe.

European Focus

And once prehumans’ use of tools allowed them to live in the temperate zones, their rate of evolution — cultural-social-biological — greatly increased, due to the much more strongly selective climate of the temperate zones. Thus, the focus of prehuman evolution shifted from the tropics to temperate Eurasia about three million years ago and has remained there since.

By the beginning of the Middle Pleistocene about 800,000 years ago the very crude chipped-pebble choppers with which man’s ancestors began their tool-making career had given way in more advanced areas to much more effective stone tools. Instead of merely knocking a few chips off a pebble to create a very rough cutting edge, the tool makers of this period shaped the whole pebble to convert it into a highly functional tool, which has been given the generic name “handax.”

The owner of a stone handax had not only a formidable weapon which increased tenfold his ability to kill enemies or medium-size game, but also a tool with which he could easily skin and dismember animals — and cut the fuel for cooking them too, because he also was using fire regularly by then. (In Europe, that is, where the earliest known hearths are a million years old. In the more slowly evolving tropical areas fire did not appear until much later. It was not used in Africa until about 60,000 years ago.)

Human Threshold

At approximately the time the cultural threshold from pebble tools to handaxes was crossed, the biological threshold from subman to man was also crossed. From about three-quarters of a million years ago true men, with brains nearly as large as those of modern Europeans (and larger than those of modern Blacks), lived in Europe, although the tropical areas of the world continued to be inhabited only by submen.

It is interesting that the first handaxes should have appeared at about the same time as the first true men, but not really surprising, when one considers the interdependence of cultural and biological factors in man’s evolution — and when one understands that pebble tools and the more sophisticated tools which supplanted them differ in more than the degree of craftsmanship required for their manufacture.

When one looks at tools of different ages in a particular area, one notes two types of differences. There is, first, generally an evolution in craftsmanship, so that one can classify any particular type of tool, say pebble choppers, as relatively primitive or relatively advanced.

Then there are differences in the type of manufacturing process between different types of tools. Some of these latter differences allow us to draw inferences about changes in the level of consciousness of the creatures who made the tools. That is, there are sometimes quantum jumps in the degree of mental abstraction required on the part of the maker in advancing from one type of tool to another.

Harder Than It Looks

Pebble tools may not look very sophisticated, but the level of intellect required to make them is substantially higher than that required to use them. Every modern archeologist worth his salt learns how to make various types of stone tools. But the average person — carpenter or businessman or engineer — who gives it a try without any prior instruction soon finds that it’s not as easy as it looks. Some types of stone will fracture properly, yielding a sharp-edged break when struck, and others will not. And there’s quite a trick to knocking just the right sort of chip off even the most suitable pebble.

But beyond these difficulties is the requirement for imagination. The animal who has a smooth pebble and wants a cutting edge must be able to visualize beforehand the transformation he is attempting to bring about. When one then goes from the very simplest pebble tools to those with a cutting edge produced by knocking a series of intersecting flakes off a pebble, the degree of conceptualization required is even greater. It is certainly a step beyond the sort of imagination required of a chimpanzee who converts a twig broken from a tree into a smooth, straight probe for pulling ants from an anthill.

Capacity for Abstraction

In advancing from a pebble chopper to a handax, the significant difference is not a higher degree of manual skill or craftsmanship required. The significant difference lies in the fact that making a handax requires a more profound transformation of the original stone than making a pebble chopper; a higher degree of abstraction is required of the tool maker to visualize in the raw stone the finished handax which it will become.

By about 350,000 years ago handax makers were producing flake tools from carefully prepared stone cores which required nearly the same degree of visualization and foresight needed by a modern diamond cutter planning the cleaving blows with which he will reduce an irregularly shaped raw diamond to one or more perfectly faceted gems.

Another type of artifact which appeared during the Middle Pleistocene was the tool whose sole purpose was to make other tools: the second-order tool. Notched-stone spokeshaves for smoothing wooden spears and arrows, chisel-like stone burins for working bone into needles and hooks, and elastic punches made of antler for producing flaked stone tools are examples.

Again, the evolutionary significance of such artifacts lies not in a higher degree of craftsmanship, but rather in the fact that they required a higher order of abstraction on the part of their makers than previous tools required. They could not appear until a certain threshold in human consciousness had been reached.

Riss-Wuerm Interglacial

By about 150,000 years ago, in the middle of the warm Riss-Wuerm interglacial period, man’s tool-making capabilities allowed him to further expand his habitat. The principal move in Europe was to the north, from the Mediterranean toward the Baltic.

The early Europeans were by this time skilled makers of stone, bone, and wooden implements. They produced sewed leather clothing and used bone- and stone-tipped spears for big-game hunting. They lived in artificial shelters heated by fire during cold weather.

When they moved north the focus of human evolution moved with them, shifting from the Atlantic and Mediterranean coastal areas of Western Europe to the great northern Eurasian plain. The cultural achievements of these northern European big-game hunters of 150,000 years ago surpassed those of all other contemporary human groups.

What were these people of the Riss-Wuerm interglacial period like? Their physical remains are, unfortunately, much scarcer than their artifacts. From Fontechevade Cave, in central France, has come some of the best evidence we have to date. Portions of two skulls dating from that period indicate a race not remarkably different from today’s Europeans. Their head shape was essentially modern, without heavy brow ridges and with a cranial capacity fully as large as that of present-day White men, but with a slightly more rugged and thicker bony structure.

No Sense of Beauty

It is only the cultural evidence — or the lack of it — which leads one to believe that man has made some evolutionary progress during the last 150,000 years. Fontechevade Man had no art, so far as we know. He was a skilled tool maker, but he and his kind left behind only their tools and weapons: no cave paintings, no engraved decorations, no sculpture, no personal ornaments, no indications whatever of a sense of beauty or a self-consciousness highly enough developed to lead them to portray in durable form their mental image of themselves and the world around him.

More than 100,000 years passed — in which Fontechevade Man was replaced by Neanderthal Man, who in turn gave way to Cro-Magnon Man — before solid evidence appeared that man had reached a level of consciousness roughly equal to today’s.

During Neanderthal times there appeared the first evidence of human self-consciousness, with human remains ritually buried instead of being left to decay where they fell. But, still, Neanderthal Man developed no art. Only with Cro-Magnon Man — who was physically at least as advanced as modern Europeans — did genuine artistic creation appear.

An End of Evolution?

Cro-Magnon Man differed only slightly from Fontechevade Man in his skeletal remains, but the cultural achievements of the former are a clear indication that he had achieved a new evolutionary level.

And, in fact, Cro-Magnon Man created art of such quality and variety, revealing such sensitivity and capacity for visualization, that one may well ask whether there has been any biological progress at all in the last 30,000 years. Certainly, there has been substantial progress in social organization (until the last 200 years, at least) and in culture. And a certain amount of European subracial differentiation must have still remained to take place since Cro-Magnon times.

But whether modern man’s capacity for culture (as opposed to his actual achievement) is greater than that of Cro-Magnon Man remains an open question. If a thousand modern European infants could be magically transported back 30,000 years in time, to grow up in the care of their Cro-Magnon ancestors, would they turn out to be creative geniuses, relatively speaking, or just ordinary Cro-Magnon citizens — or perhaps even sluggards? We do not know, although further findings may eventually suggest an answer.

Thus, it may be that our race had already reached, in Cro-Magnon times, a point of diminishing returns in the balance between the biological and the cultural-social aspects of evolution. The more effective man’s social organizations and his technology became in shielding him from the selective pressures of his environment, the less biological progress he made from one generation to the next. Indeed, there can be no doubt at all that the race has gone backward biologically during the last few hundred years, with large portions of each generation which should have been eliminated early in life by environmental pressures surviving to reproduce.

We may, in fact, see in this phenomenon the explanation for the narrowing of the evolutionary gap between the Mongoloid and European races during the last few hundred thousand years. Europeans achieved the Homo sapiens evolutionary grade long before the Mongoloids, but the superior European technology may have been the factor which allowed the Mongoloids, evolving in a climate of similar rigor, to begin catching up. Even the much more retarded races of Africa have narrowed the evolutionary gap somewhat between themselves and Europeans in the last million years or so.

Conscious Evolution

The lesson in this is obvious: there came a point in the upward evolution of the Cosmos when the evolutionary mechanism of natural selection should have been smoothly taken over by a conscious process of artificial selection, not just on a temporary and local basis as in ancient Sparta and in National Socialist Germany, but permanently and universally. When that point came we cannot be sure, but it may have been 30,000 years ago.

It should also be clear that the way to clean up the present mess our race has gotten itself into and avoid getting into a similar mess in the future lies not in a cultural retrogression or Luddite-like suppression of, technological progress but in bringing the biological progress of the race once again into line with its cultural progress.

Next month we will trace the cultural and social progress of our race from Cro-Magnon times toward the Neolithic Age.

ILLUSTRATIONS

a) AUSTRALOPITHECINES of three million years ago, as rendered by an artist. They may have been the first tool makers on this planet.

b) THERE IS AN OVERLAP between human and animal culture, just as there is between human and animal instinctual behavior. Chimpanzees regularly use sticks and stones as tools and weapons and have learned how to modify some natural objects to make better tools of them. Furthermore, their use and modification of natural objects is, to a large extent, learned by observation. The adolescent chimpanzee (left) preparing to hurl a stone at another chimp with whom he is having a quarrel, has learned this use of stones by watching his elders. Other chimpanzee behavior besides the use of tools and weapons is reflected in many ways in human behavior. The peculiarly Jewish genital-touching greeting used in Old Testament times, for example, probably had its origin in a generalized primate practice observed in chimpanzees. (Translators of the Old Testament into Aryan languages have generally euphemized descriptions of this practice by rendering it as the placing of one Jew’s hand “under the thigh” of the other.) Likewise, certain primitive races today, such as the African Bushmen, still show a number of behavioral traits seen more often in non-human primates than in the higher human races. Just as the female chimpanzee will crouch in the primate intercourse position with her buttocks elevated as a sign of submission to a dominant male even when no sexual intercourse is anticipated, female Bushmen will “present” their genitalia in a similar fashion, as the one above is doing. The distinguished ethologist, Professor Irenaeus Eibl-Eibesfeldt, has written of the Bushmen: “…genital displays, including sexual presentation in a primate-like fashion, are performed by girls…. Certainly, we are dealing here with one of the older primate behavior patterns, which persist in some human groups more than in others.”

MAN’S FIRST TOOLS: The pebble chopper (above) is from Olduvai Gorge, Africa, and is more than 1,000,000 years old. The handax (right) is from Swanscombe, England, and is about 500,000 years old.

CRO-MAGNON art yields little in subtlety or precision to that of our own time. Considering the limited tools and facilities available, Cro-Magnon paintings on rough cave walls (such as the cave of Altamira, Spain, where several exquisite paintings of bison have been found) are phenomenal. Further findings of the cultural remnants of these 30,000-year-old ancestors of ours may help us evaluate better their level of consciousness relative to our own. Who knows what poets, philosophers, and statesmen may have lived in prehistoric Europe?

Thirty thousand years ago Europe was entering the last part of a million-year-long succession of Ice Ages. Actually, for a few thousand years around that time the climate was relatively mild, with an average temperature approaching today’s. This mild period was a break between the earlier and later portions of the Wuerm Ice Age.

Harsh Environment

By the time the glaciation associated with the Wuerm Ice Age had advanced to its final maximum, around 25,000 years ago, a great ice sheet thousands of feet thick covered Scotland, most of Ireland, all of Scandinavia except the east coast of Denmark, northern Germany, the Baltic countries, northern Poland, and northwestern Russia. In addition separate Alpine glaciers covered large parts of the mountainous regions of Europe.

Substantial areas of Europe which remained unglaciated were so cold that they consisted only of treeless, scrub-covered tundra. Only in a few parts of Europe was there heavy forestation during the last Wuerm maximum.

For more than 10,000 years the climate of Europe approximated that of northern Alaska today, until, about 12,000 years ago, the ice once again began receding and the forests sprang up in its wake.

It was in such an environment, usually harsh and demanding, though with milder periods interrupting the frigid normality, that our ancestors underwent their last period of development.

Stimulus of the North

It has been mentioned before in this series, but it is worth repeating: the various populations of men and submen living in different parts of the world were subject to quite different environments during their evolution. The glacial conditions that existed in Europe and northern Asia off and on during the last million or so years never reached the tropical regions of the earth. Only in the earth’s north temperate zone were man and his predecessors subjected to the repeated climatic changes associated with the advance and retreat of the great ice sheets, and, more importantly, to the perennial demands of the winter season.

The relatively constant and moderate living conditions in the tropics did not subject the inhabitants there to the rigorous selective pressures which were exerted in the north. The poor planner, the inefficient worker, the irresponsible ne’er-do-well who could get by in the seasonless tropics perished in the north during the first winter for which he failed to make the necessary preparations.

Lagging Tropics

Thus, evolution proceeded at a much faster rate in Europe and in northern Asia than in Africa and other tropical areas. Submen crossed the human threshold in Europe three-quarters of a million years before they did so in Africa. The cultural achievements of our Ice Age ancestors, living sometimes in the cool northern forest and sometimes on the frigid, treeless tundra, reached a level never matched by Negroes, even today. What passes for Negro sculpture and architecture and is proudly held up as evidence of the Negro ability to construct buildings of stone and make art objects of bronze and iron as early as two millennia ago did not develop indigenously. The necessary technology came from the north, first from the Phoenicians and the Egyptians, and later from the Arabs.

And, as we shall see, these Mediterranean bearers of culture to Africa had earlier been the beneficiaries of inventive genius which flowered still further north. But that takes us ahead of our story.

Upper Paleolithic Man

For roughly 20,000 years during the closing chapter of the Ice Ages — the period known to archaeologists as the Upper Paleolithic, or “late old stone age” — our ancestors lived as big-game hunters in Europe, ranging from the Mediterranean coast to the edge of the ice in the north. Their physical remains and those of their artifacts are relatively plentiful, giving us a great deal of information about them and their lifestyle.

One of the most striking things about the Upper Paleolithic inhabitants of Europe was their physical homogeneity. Measurements made on their skeletal remains indicate a population more racially homogeneous than that of any European country today — and this population was spread over an enormous area throughout a span of time very long compared to that of all recorded human history.

As one would expect, the evidence of their art indicates a corresponding degree of psychic homogeneity. A remarkable similarity exists, for example, in cave paintings found at locations ranging from the Iberian peninsula all the way to the Urals, a distance of more than 3,000 miles.

Sexual Dimorphism

They were a tall, long-limbed, sturdily built race. They had narrow hips, broad shoulders, deep chests, and large hands and feet. The average height of the males was nearly 69 inches, taller than the average for any European country today except Iceland.

These Upper Paleolithic White men and women exhibited a large degree of sexual dimorphism, or physical difference between the sexes. The average height of the women was nearly seven inches less than that of the men, and their skulls were not only smaller but showed other secondary sexual differences, resulting in a less “masculine” and more “feminine” facial appearance. Whereas the men had distinctly craggy, faces, those of the women had softer contours.

Racial Variation

Sexual dimorphism varies greatly among the present-day races. Mongoloids, for example, have relatively slightly developed secondary sexual characteristics, while Europeans, on the average, show much greater secondary differences between the sexes. And among the subraces of the White race sexual dimorphism increases from south to north, with Mediterraneans exhibiting the least dimorphism and Nordics the most.

In general, a large degree of sexual dimorphism in a race is an indication of evolutionary adaptation to markedly different male and female social roles. When men and women have similar lifestyles, there is relatively little need for them to differ physically, except in their reproductive organs. But in the big-game hunting society of Upper Paleolithic Europe, the men went out into the forests or the tundra to do the hunting and killing, and the women stayed at home to bear and raise the children — for a thousand generations.

Rugged, Brainy

Upper Paleolithic Whites had broad, rugged faces with large, wide jaws, prominent chins, and — judging from the nasal openings in their skulls — prominent noses of narrow-to-medium width. And they had large brains: nearly 100 cubic centimeters larger than the White average today.

They were predominantly dolichocephalic (long-headed, like modern Nordics and Mediterraneans), although this was one physical trait in which the Upper Paleolithic population showed substantial diversity, with a larger minority of mesocephalic and brachycephalic (round-headed, like modern Alpines) skulls in the west than in the east.

Throughout the Upper Paleolithic this White proto-race lived not only in Europe but also in a band stretching across northern Asia to the Pacific. In Siberia and other eastern regions they were eventually displaced or absorbed by Mongoloid peoples, although isolated pockets of them have survived even until the present (the Ainu people of Japan seem to be an example, but even they show Mongoloid admixture).

Glacial Retreat

In Europe, when the Ice Ages came to an end, some of the White big-game hunters changed their way of life, and some did not, but instead followed the retreating glaciers northward as they shrank back toward their nucleus in the mountains of the Scandinavian peninsula.

Neither the Nordics nor the Alpines of today are physically identical to the Upper Paleolithic Whites, although both are ultimately related to them. In both the Nordic and the Alpine areas of Europe, however, one finds local populations which are essentially Upper Paleolithic in type. By selecting from these populations individuals whose skeletal measurements fit those of Upper Paleolithic fossils, we can gain a good idea of what the Ice Age hunters of 25,000 years ago looked like.

And from their artifacts we can gain a good idea of how they lived. Most of these artifacts are tools or weapons made of bone or stone, but there are also carved art-objects, paintings, hearths, and remnants of dwellings.

Craftsmen and Artists

They made a great variety of stone implements, prominent among which were long, thin blades struck from carefully prepared stone cores with a single, precise blow. Such stone blades were not entirely unknown during the preceding, Neanderthal stage of human development, but now they became much more common, and the tool-making technology associated with them took several strides forward.

Another distinguishing feature of Upper Paleolithic European culture was the extensive use of bone. It was carved into sewing needles, clothing fastenings and ornaments, statuettes, harpoon and spear heads, musical instruments, and many other items, using stone tools manufactured especially for the purpose.

The Upper Paleolithic economy was based on herd animals: horses, woolly mammoths, bison, and, especially, reindeer. These animals flourished on the tundra, and the people of Europe depended almost totally on them. From their flesh came food, from their hides clothing and coverings for shelters, and from their bones tools and implements.

Permanent Villages

Some groups of hunters apparently followed the herds on their seasonal migrations, but others established year-around settlements. Typically these settlements were occupied by from five to 20 families (from 20 to 100 individuals), and the habitations varied from single-family huts, probably covered with animal skins, to long, multi-family houses with gable roofs. One such Ice Age long house in southern Russia was nearly 450 feet long.

Despite the harsh environment, the tundra supported large herds, and the hunters apparently had plenty to eat. They obviously had the leisure time — and the inclination — to devote themselves to non-essential pastimes, such as art and music.

Birth of Ceramics

These Ice Age Europeans were inventive people. In a few thousand years they introduced more cultural innovations than in all of mankind’s previous existence.

They learned, for example, to use coal as a fuel. And they learned that by firing statuettes and other objects molded of clay, they obtained a much more durable. water-resistant product. Fired-clay objects recently found at Dolni Vestonice, in Moravia, and dated at 28,000 years ago represent man’s first use of the ceramic techniques which played such an important role in his later cultural development. Until quite recently, archaeologists had assumed that ceramic technology was first developed by farming peoples in the Middle East almost 20,000 years later.

There is also evidence that the Ice Age hunters carried on trade over distances of hundreds of miles, at least.

Ice-Age Archers

Two enormously significant inventions which date from the closing phase of the Wuerm Ice Age are the spear-thrower and the bow. Approximately 15,000 years ago Upper Paleolithic Whites learned to throw a hunting spear with much greater force by using the leverage provided by a piece of carved reindeer antler hooked over the butt. This invention gradually spread over the world, and the racially backward Australian aborigines still use spear-throwers for hunting today.

Some 11,000 years ago our European ancestors invented the world’s second propulsive weapon, the bow. Although the earliest bow which has been found (at Holmgard, Denmark) is only about 8,000 years old, collections of arrows 3,000 years older, with clearly identifiable notches for a bowstring, have been unearthed at Stellmoor, near Hamburg. The bow gave man an incalculable advantage in hunting, as he no longer had to creep up on his prey to within spear range.

Two gaps in Upper Paleolithic man’s cultural achievements are primarily responsible for the limitations in our knowledge of him and his ways: he did not write, and he seldom portrayed human beings in his prolific art.

First Writing

Actually, the world’s first writing may have appeared in western Europe shortly after the close of the last Ice Age, during the Mesolithic period (middle stone age). We will look at the evidence for that in the next installment in this series. But from the Ice Ages only a few geometric symbols and patterns of dots and scratches have come down to us. It is believed that some of these were used as a means of keeping track of time and, thus, constitute the earliest approaches to a calendar, but they convey virtually no information to us.

We are puzzled as to why our Ice Age ancestors, who possessed marvelous artistic ability, lavished it almost exclusively on the animals they hunted and so seldom produced drawings or carvings of men and their activities. In the few cases where human beings are portrayed in cave paintings, they are usually stick figures, with little or no detail shown.

And most of the human carvings from this period are only caricatures of people, the most common item being the so-called “venuses,” which were obviously female sex-objects (perhaps with fertility-cult significance) rather than attempts at realistic portrayals. It is possible, of course, that other art showing people was produced, but on perishable material, such as wood, which has not survived.

Conservative Neanderthals

One of the most interesting questions we have about the Upper Paleolithic period is why the people who lived then were so much more progressive culturally than those who preceded them. During the more than 600,000 years of the Middle Pleistocene — spanning approximately the time from the first crossing of the sapiens threshold in Europe to the time of the Neanderthals — cultural progress was extremely slow, hardly any changes taking place over thousands of generations (although European culture still remained well ahead of culture elsewhere in the world).

And Neanderthal Man himself was an extraordinarily conservative creature. During the 100,000 or so years of his existence he made no major innovations, but merely continued a slow elaboration and development of the flake-tool industry inherited from his predecessors.

Spurt of Progress

It is true that during the Riss-Wuerm interglacial period some 150,000 years ago (before the appearance of Neanderthal
Man and just after man’s expansion into the northern Eurasian plain) there was a relatively sudden spurt of technological progress. Tools and weapons found at Ehringsdorf, Germany, on the edge of the northern plain, dating from that time are far ahead of anything known previously — or anything from more southerly sites of the same age. Among the Ebringsdorf implements are the world’s first true projectile points, the heads of hand-thrown spears.

But it was not until the appearance of Cro-Magnon Man more than 100,000 years later, at the beginning of the Upper Paleolithic, that the sort of progress seen at Ehringsdorf once more took hold.

A New Race

Actually, there was no sudden technological revolution to usher in the Upper Paleolithic. The first Upper Paleolithic tools were not dissimilar from those of the Neanderthal period. The Upper Paleolithic revolution was racial rather than cultural.

The break with the past was in the appearance of a new race of men, and the men of this new race, within a few thousand years, created a technological revolution which brought forth ceramics and archery, among other things. Even from the beginning of the Upper Paleolithic, however, it was evident that the new race was of a higher evolutionary grade than anything which had come before; this evidence was in the capacity for music and art which manifested itself then.

Neoteny

One modern explanation of the racial transformation from Neanderthal Man to Cro-Magnon Man involves the zoological phenomenon called neoteny. Animals displaying this phenomenon are those which fail to develop fully to the adult stage and retain certain larval or infantile characteristics throughout their life spans. Young neotenous animals differ from non-neotenous animals of the same species only in their glandular functions; a gland controlling maturation fails to produce the normal level of hormones.

Since young Neanderthals much more closely resembled young Cro-Magnons than the adults of the two races resembled each other, it has been suggested that a mutation occurred at some time around 40,000 years ago involving a change in Neanderthal Man’s pituitary gland. The “childlike” (relative to Neanderthal Man) Cro-Magnon race was the result, and Cro-Magnon Man’s neotenous condition manifested itself psychically in his musical and artistic inclinations and in the absence of the extreme conservatism which characterized his predecessors.

Our First Kinsmen

Whether neoteny provides the correct explanation for the developments of the Upper Paleolithic period or not, it is clear that the race which hunted reindeer on the tundra of northern Europe from the second Wuerm glacial advance until about 10,000 years ago was essentially modern, not only physically but also psychically, and was, therefore, the first race to appear on this earth with whom we can feel the bond of full kinship.

In the next installment we will follow the Upper Paleolithic people of Europe into the Mesolithic period, and we will examine the cultural and subracial developments which took place then, including the first appearance of the Indo-Europeans, or Aryans.

ILLUSTRATIONS

a) EUROPE 25,000 years ago, the time of the last glacial maximum: the Upper Paleolithic sites mentioned in the text are indicated on the map. Note that Europe’s coastal configuration was substantially different during the Ice Ages, because of lowered sea levels. The English Channel, St. George’s Channel, the North Sea, and the head of the Adriatic Sea were dry land, although ice covered portions of all but the last.

b) THIS MAMMOTH-IVORY carving of a woman’s head is one of the very few realistic portrayals of human beings from the Upper Paleolithic period. It came from Brassempouy, in the extreme southwestern corner of France.

c) ICE AGE SURVIVORS in Europe today: these men have skeletal measurements which fit almost perfectly the pattern of the White big-game hunters of the Upper Paleolithic period. The two on the left are from Sweden (Goeteborg and Helsingborg), the two on the right are from Ireland (County Cork and County Clare), and the one in the middle is a Ruthenian from the Ukraine.

d) UPPER PALEOLITHIC hunters’ houses, as reconstructed by an artist from remnants found at Ostrava-Petrkovice, Czechoslovakia.

e) THIS MAN lived 25,000 years ago at Sungir, near Moscow. More than 3,000 carved ivory beads were sewn in decorative patterns on his leather clothing, long since turned to dust. The time and effort which must have been required to produce such apparel indicates a well-defined social division of labor and an economy sufficiently prosperous to allow non-essential crafts to flourish.

f) THE BOW shown here, from Denmark, is only 8,000 years old, but arrows with chisel-shaped stone heads have been found at 11,000-year-old sites in Germany.

g) THESE FLUTES, made from hollow bird bones, are from the Dordogne valley of southwestern France. They are approximately 27,000 years old.
h)
THIS CLAY HEAD was sculpted at Doini Vestonice, Moravia, about 28,000 years ago.

i) THE SPEAR-THROWER was invented by a White hunter of Upper Paleolithic Europe about 15,000 years ago. Typically made from a piece of reindeer antler and decorated with animal carvings, the spear-thrower gave the hunter additional leverage and allowed him to hurl his spear or harpoon faster and further. It was the world’s first propulsive weapon.

THIS BROKEN REMNANT of one of our ancestors’ artistic creations was carved from the Ivory of a wooly mammoth tusk. The artist and the horse he portrayed lived near Vogelherd, in southern Germany, 30,000 years ago.

THESE SYMBOLS carved on a piece of antler found at Isturitz, France, are 12,000 years old and may be man’s oldest pictographs, although their meaning, if any, is presently unknown. Does the rayed figure symbolize the rising or setting sun?

THE CAVE COMPLEX of Le Madeleine, in the Dordogne region of southwestern France, was inhabited by White big-game hunters toward the close of the Wuerm Ice Age. The caves where Upper Paleolithic artifacts have been found are the lowest openings in the cliff face, just above the river. The ruins above are those of a medieval castle. From La Madeleine comes the generic name of a whole culture, the Magdalenian, the highest and last peak of Ice Age man’s cultural achievement.

Roughly 10,000 years ago the glaciers which had covered much of Europe for so long melted, and the 3,000,000-year-long geologic epoch known as the Pleistocene came to an end.

The Pleistocene had seen the first tools and weapons made by man’s prehuman ancestors; the firm establishment of the various racial divisions of these prehumans, as the different hominid stocks continued their divergence from common roots in the preceding Pliocene epoch; the expansion of the hominid habitat from the original subtropical savanna to include the earth’s northern temperate zone; the evolution of the various geographically separated hominid racial groups across the human threshold at various times; and the continued, slow, cultural-biological-social evolution of European man until the Upper Paleolithic period, beginning roughly 40,000 years ago, when he acquired the physical and psychical traits which made him virtually indistinguishable from his present-day descendants.

Disappearing Tundra

During the Upper Paleolithic period (i.e., the late old stone age) Europeans were hunters of the herd animals which flourished on the frozen tundra covering much of Europe during that time. But when the glaciers melted and the tundra thawed and forests sprang up across the face of Europe, our ancestors were forced to change their lifestyle.

The roving herds of reindeer, bison, mammoths, and other animals which were adapted to the tundra were not able to survive in the dense, northern forests. One dramatic example of a tundra-adapted animal was the Giant Irish Deer (Megaceros giganteus), which had an antler spread of up to 11 feet. With such massive antlers it simply could not move through heavily forested areas, and it became extinct.

Most of the herd animals succumbed to the loss of their food supply, which consisted of the small, scrubby, ground-hugging plants of the tundra. As the forests spread over the former tundra, the trees kept the life-sustaining sunlight from the forest floor, and the tundra vegetation could not grow.

Changing Lifestyle

This transition from tundra to forest took place quite rapidly, the glacier which covered northern Europe retreating at a rate of about 20 miles per century at the close of the Pleistocene. The resulting transition in European lifestyle and culture was also rather abrupt, and it signaled the beginning of the period known to archaeologists as the Mesolithic (i.e., the middle stone age).

A much more profound revolution in lifestyle and culture came later, with the beginning of the Neolithic period (i.e., the new stone age). The Neolithic revolution involved the change from hunting, fishing, and gathering for sustenance to farming and animal domestication. The Mesolithic period was, in a sense, a transitional period between the herd-hunting lifestyle of the Upper Paleolithic and the farming lifestyle of the Neolithic, but it also saw some innovative and highly successful cultural-social developments of its own.

Unlike the sharp transition from Upper Paleolithic to Mesolithic, the transition to the Neolithic was more diffuse. It spread rather gradually throughout Europe over a period of more than 3,000 years, during which time the climate became suitable for farming, first in the south and then in the north.

Varying Mesolithic

Thus, the duration of the Mesolithic period varied for different areas of Europe. In northern Europe it lasted longest from the glacial retreat of 10,000 years ago to the replacement of the first post-glacial, cold-adapted, evergreen forests of the north by deciduous forests of oak and other temperate-zone trees about 6,000 years ago. In southeastern Europe it lasted as little as 2,000 years — even less in Greece.

As the warmer climate spread northward in Europe, carrying with it successive varieties of forest, new peoples and cultures also entered Europe from the south. The Mesolithic was, thus, a period of changing racial patterns in Europe as well as changing climate and lifestyles.

During the nearly 30,000-year duration of the Upper Paleolithic, the racial character of northern Europe, from Ireland to the Urals, was quite uniform, as was the lifestyle. But shortly after the advent of the Mesolithic, the uniformity was lost: a part of the Upper Paleolithic population followed the retreating ice northward and maintained a modified Upper Paleolithic lifestyle well into Mesolithic times; a part remained in the forests that sprang up on the thawed tundra and developed a distinctive, new, Mesolithic lifestyle; and a part began interacting almost immediately with the new peoples and cultures from the south, making the transition to a Neolithic lifestyle quite rapidly.

New Racial Patterns

New lifestyles inevitably lead, in time, to new racial characteristics, because of the strong interdependence of cultural and biological evolution. Thus, only the first group mentioned in the preceding paragraph retained a purely Upper Paleolithic racial character. In the south racial migrations and racial mixture began taking place. And even where there was no significant racial intermixture, there were biological changes, a notable example being the process of brachycephalization (increasing head breadth) which affected significant areas of Europe, beginning in Mesolithic times and continuing even into historic times, eventually producing the Alpine subrace of today.

That part of the Upper Paleolithic population which adapted itself to forest living when the tundra disappeared did so quite successfully. The most outstanding Mesolithic cultural pattern which developed in northern Europe has been given the name Maglemosian by the archaeologists, with a site in a Danish bog at Mullerup on the Baltic yielding artifacts considered typical. (The name itself comes from the Danish words magle mose, meaning “large bog.”)

When their herds of reindeer disappeared about 10,000 years ago, the pre-Maglemosians turned to fishing and forest hunting. For the former they became skilled boat builders, navigating all the rivers and coasts of northern Europe, They developed fishhooks, fishnets, and other paraphernalia for efficient fishing.

For the latter they greatly expanded the use of the bow, which they had invented just before the close of the Upper Paleolithic. In order to be able to make forest clearings for their villages and to utilize trees for structural purposes, they developed ground-stone axes, which were much more effective at felling trees than the flaked-stone axes of the Upper Paleolithic.

Solitary Hunters

The Maglemosian forest-dwellers became solitary hunters, in contrast to their Upper Paleolithic forebears, who had hunted in bands. They domesticated the dog as an aid in hunting, and they invented skis and sleds for winter mobility. And they settled new areas, which had not been habitable earlier, such as Scotland.

Although most of the Maglemosian sites which have been excavated are in northwestern Europe, centering around Denmark, the Maglemosian culture spread among the racially similar people who lived in the vast forest covering the entire northern Eurasian plain. A Maglemosian site has recently been dug up by Russian archaeologists as far east as Perm, in the western foothills of the Urals.

An outgrowth of the Maglemosian culture is named after another Danish site, Ertebolle, which lay on the north coast of the Danish peninsula in late Mesolithic times. The Ertebolle people were primarily fishermen, and they developed the first real pottery in their part of Europe.

To the south, in the region of the French Pyrenees, the descendants of the Upper Paleolithic people who had developed the Magdalenian culture modified their tools and weapons in the Mesolithic period to produce what is known to archaeologists as the Azilian culture (after the cave at Mas d’Azil, France, where typical artifacts have been found). The Azilian culture is not particularly exciting in most respects, but a few of the Azilian artifacts are enigmatic, indeed.

From the cave at Mas d’Azil and from a few nearby sites archaeologists have recovered pebbles painted with symbols which are strongly suggestive of alphabetic characters believed to have originated in the eastern Mediterranean area some 5,000 years later. The conventional archaeological reaction to the Azilian “alphabet stones” has been to dismiss them as a fluke, the symbols on them being mere random daubings, without linguistic significance, which by chance happen to resemble later Phoenician, Cretan, and Greek alphabetic characters.

The rational basis for this reaction is that the Azilian symbols seem to stand by themselves; no earlier symbols have been found from which the Azilian ones were obviously derived. In the eastern Mediterranean and in Mesopotamia, on the other hand, archaeologists can trace the development of written language from pictographs (drawings resembling the object or action named) to more and more abstract symbols, culminating in a true alphabet in the eastern Mediterranean and in Sumerian cuneiform word-symbols in Mesopotamia.

Oriental Bias

But there is more than the rational involved in the conventional reaction to the Azilian symbols. A bias in favor of the Middle East as the “cradle of civilization” has been so strong for so long that it dies hard, even in the face of the rapidly mounting proof that many of the arts of civilization — although not cities themselves — had their origins in Europe rather than in the Middle East.

Part of this bias was originally religious in nature and stemmed from the veneration formerly attached to the Old Testament by Europeans. Jewish mythology, of course, locates the Garden of Eden, whence man and his culture supposedly spread over the earth, in the Middle East.

Also, the oldest cities quite clearly were in the Middle East — the ruins of Jericho, for example, date back some 9,000 years — and there was an understandable tendency to assume that a higher intellectual and cultural level existed in the teeming cities of the Middle East than in the scattered villages of Europe in the millennia following the close of the Ice Age. Thus arose the archaeological presumption, ex oriente lux (light from the east), which saw the Middle East as a brightly glowing center of cultural innovation, from which new inventions and ideas spread out like illuminating rays, eventually reaching even the most backward areas of Europe.

Whether the 9,000-year-old Azilian alphabet stones are meaningless daubings or man’s first writing can only be decided after a great deal more archaeological research into the Mesolithic period has been done. Uncovering Mesolithic artifacts in Europe is much more difficult than finding Neolithic artifacts in the Middle East, where population densities were 100 times greater. But what is already certain is that many cultural innovations which had formerly been attributed to the Middle East actually were European in origin.

Neolithic Revolution

There can be little doubt, however, that the Neolithic revolution began in the Middle East. At the time when the first cereal grains were being cultivated in the Middle East more than 10,000 years ago, the climate in Europe was wholly unsuitable for farming. By about 9,000 years ago, however, farming had spread to eastern Greece. By 8,000 years ago it had reached Italy and the Balkans.

And as the climate in Europe continued to change, farming moved northward. By about 6,000 years ago it had virtually blanketed Europe, reaching as far as northern Scotland, where evidence of 6,000-year-old cultivated grains was found earlier this year.

For some time, however, the new Neolithic and the older Mesolithic lifestyles existed side by side in Europe. The cultural uniformity that had existed during the Upper Paleolithic was not regained in Europe, in fact, until the Middle Ages. And, as already mentioned, with cultural changes came racial changes.

Until now we have traced the development of a single, rather homogeneous racial group: the Whites of the Upper Paleolithic period who hunted the herds on the northern Eurasian plain, and their forest-and-coast-dwelling descendants in the Mesolithic period. In the last installment we saw what they looked like: tall, ruggedly built, large-headed people with broad faces, large jaws, and craggy features. There were substantial secondary sexual differences between male and female adults.

Mediterranean Subrace

But throughout the whole Upper Paleolithic period there was another subracial type on the southern and southeastern margins of Europe. Averaging about five inches shorter than the Upper Paleolithic Whites, with slenderer builds, smaller heads, narrower faces, and more delicate features, the male and female members of this southern subrace were quite similar in skeletal appearance. That is, they were a pedomorphic subrace, to use the ethnological term; the adults did not develop as strong a degree of sexual differentiation as did the Upper Paleolithic Whites. These were the ancestors of today’s small, dark, narrow faced, pedomorphic Mediterraneans.

Some 150,000 years ago, during the relatively mild Riss-Wuerm interglacial period, the ancestors of the Upper Paleolithic Whites first expanded from southern Europe into the northern Eurasian plain, as described in the third installment in this series. But some of their fellows remained behind, along both the northern and southern shores of the Mediterranean and in the Middle East. Those who went north and became big-game hunters went through the Neanderthaloid phase and eventually evolved into the Cro-Magnon type of the Upper Paleolithic. Those who remained in the south evolved under different conditions, becoming the Mediterranean type.

Blond Pharaohs

There was never total isolation between the Upper Paleolithic people and the Mediterraneans. In North Africa and in the Middle East there are a few Ice Age fossils of the taller, more rugged Upper Paleolithic types as well as of the smaller Mediterraneans. And later, during the Mesolithic and Neolithic periods, groups of men from northern Europe evidently wandered as far south as Libya, because Egyptian artists (who were of the Mediterranean type) portrayed Libyans as blond, with Nordic features. Today, of course, these Libyan Nordics have disappeared without a trace into a dark sea of Mediterraneans and Mediterranean-Negro hybrids.

Mediterraneans, however, have predominated heavily in north Africa and the Middle East for at least the last 10,000 years. In the Middle East it was they who first turned from food gathering to food producing, thus introducing the Neolithic revolution. To be sure, other subracial types made their presence felt in the south during Neolithic times — the Sumerians, for example, differed in several subracial characteristics from their Mediterranean neighbors, and several members of the Egyptian royalty were blond, the first known instance being Queen Hetep-Heres II of the IVth Dynasty, daughter of Cheops, builder of the great pyramid — but it was much more the Mediterraneans who made their presence felt in the north.

Population Explosion

Farming and animal husbandry is a vastly more efficient lifestyle than hunting and gathering, and it allows a given area to support a much larger population. The population density in the earliest Neolithic areas exploded by a factor of about a hundred, whereas Mesolithic Europe remained virtually empty in comparison.

Thus, when Neolithic Mediterranean farmers began moving north and west, they were able to initially swamp Europe’s sparsely settled Mesolithic hunters. Three principal streams of Mediterranean immigrants entered Europe: those who crossed from North Africa into the Iberian peninsula; those who settled Greece and Italy by sea; and those who moved northward around the eastern end of the Mediterranean, thence across the Bosporus into the Balkans, and finally along the Danube valley into central Europe.

The Mediterraneans brought their new lifestyle with them and their genes. Some of them, unfortunately, were contaminated with a Negroid strain, as evidenced by the prognathous character of some of the skulls from this period. The net result was that much of Europe became predominantly Mediterranean in subracial character early in Neolithic times.

Nordic Migrations

As the hunting and fishing people of Europe began farming and breeding livestock themselves, they were able to greatly expand their numbers too, but the strong Mediterranean subracial element remained in all but the northernmost areas of Europe.

However, the Cro-Magnon types were reinforced by migrations in a few areas, rather than being swamped; not all the immigrants who moved north in Neolithic times were short, dark, and pedomorphic. In the next installment we will look at the megalith builders who traveled by sea up the Atlantic coast to Britain, western France, and Scandinavia; and at the Battle-ax People, who moved from the plains of southern Russia across central Europe to northern Germany and Scandinavia.

ILLUSTRASTIONS

AZILIAN “alphabet stones” were painted with symbols strikingly similar to ones archaeologists believe originated in the Mediterranean area around 4,000 years ago, but the Azilian symbols are approximately 9,000 years old! Did Mesolithic Europeans develop the world’s first alphabet, or are these symbols meaningless? Only more archaeological evidence than is now available can provide an answer.

CAVE ENTRANCE at Mas d’Azil, in southern France. Mesolithic hunters sheltered here and produced tools, weapons, and other artifacts — perhaps including the first known specimens of writing — which typify the Azilian culture of post-glacial Europe.

TARTARIA tablet (left), one of three baked-clay tablets inscribed with pictographic symbols which were dug up at Tartaria, Romania, in 1961, has been dated at 7,500 years old by radiocarbon assay of charcoal found with it. The symbols on the Tartaria tablet are strongly suggestive of Sumerian pictographs, as on the 5,500-year-old Sumerian tablet to the right. Archaeologists long believed, however, that writing originated in Sumeria about 5,500 years ago and gradually spread westward and northward. They tended, therefore, to discount the significance of all evidence to the contrary. As recently as a decade ago one archaeologist wrote: “But do the Tartaria tablets actually bear writing? Probably not…. It seems quite possible that they are merely an uncomprehending imitation of more civilized peoples’ written records…. Perhaps the Tartaria tablets are nothing more than a pretense by some unlettered barbarian to command the magic embodied in an art he had witnessed but did not understand.” Such an interpretation can only be made if one disbelieves the radiocarbon date of the Tartaria tablets.

ALPINE subrace is characterized by medium stature, stocky build, round heads. Their pigmentation varies from blond to brunet. They are descended from Upper Paleolithic Whites through a process which has involved a reduction in stature, an increase in relative head breadth, and a slight decrease in sexual differentiation. The man on the left is a German from Brandenburg, the one in the middle is a German from the Spreewald, and the one on the right is a Hungarian.

MEDITERRANEAN subrace is characterized by small stature, dark complexion, dark hair and eyes, pedomorphy, narrow-to-medium skulls. This subrace probably branched from the Paleolithic White root stock about 150,000 years ago, remaining on the southern fringe of Europe and in northern Africa and the Middle East while other Paleolithic Whites moved into the northern Eurasian plain. The man to the left is from Crete, the one in the middle is from Portugal, and the one on the right is from Bulgaria.

Before we consider the racial and cultural complexities of the Neolithic period and the ensuing Bronze Age, let us briefly summarize the principal developments of the first five installments in this series.

From the Beginning, some 15 billion years ago, we traced the ongoing self-creation of the Cosmos through an ascending continuum of evolutionary stages. We saw the first biological life appear on the earth 3.5 billion years ago, and we followed its development through ever higher and more complex forms, from protozoan to mammal, in the Cosmic quest for self-consciousness.

Antiquity of Races

We saw the primate line separate from the rest of the mammals 70 million years ago, and 25 million years ago we saw the hominid line — man’s ancestral line — split off from that of the pongids (manlike apes). After that the hominid line continued to evolve, and by sometime late in the Pliocene epoch, about four or five million years ago, it had diversified into several distinct races of Australopithecines.

The Australopithecines were chimpanzee-sized primates who hunted and ate other animals and made and used simple stone tools. Near the beginning of the Pleistocene epoch, approximately three million years ago, one of the more advanced races of Australopithecities expanded beyond the tropical savanna of Africa, which was its original habitat, into the earth’s northern temperate zone. To this race belonged European man’s prehuman ancestors. Although no Australopithecine fossils have yet been found in Europe, artifacts have been found there which must have been made by Australopithecines.

Under the greater selective pressure of the northern environment, these early ancestors of ours evolved — culturally, biologically, and socially, the three aspects strongly interdependent — much faster than their cousins who remained in the tropics. They crossed the threshold from Australopithecus to Homo erectus, and then finally reached the sapiens level about three-quarters of a. million years ago, hundreds of thousands of years before any of the non-White races. Vertesszoelloes Man, whose fossils in Hungary are of that age, still retained many of the primitive features of H. erectus, but his brain was large enough to qualify him as H. sapiens.

Mediterranean Separation

The descendants of Vertesszoelloes Man continued to evolve throughout the more than 600,000 years of the Middle Pleistocene. As we saw, European culture advanced from the crude handaxes of Vertesszoelloes Man to the finely crafted implements of stone, wood, and bone made by men on the edge of the northern European plain during the Riss-Wuerm interglacial period, about 150,000 years ago.

It was from this time, immediately prior to the Neanderthal phase of human development, that the separation of the European stock took place which led eventually to the Cro-Magnon subrace on the one hand and to the widely varied group of racial types which have been classified as “Mediterranean” on the other hand. This separation, which was never total, came about as the result of a complex of changes involving climate, habitat expansion, and lifestyle.

Cro-Magnon Ancestors

During the relatively mild Riss-Wuerm interglacial period, the first Europeans began living in the northern plain. They were a relatively advanced group, whose cultural attainments made it possible for them to adapt successfully to the new habitat.

But others remained in the southern coastal areas of Europe and in the adjacent portions of northern Africa and the Middle East. As the Wuerm glaciation brought a more severe climate to Europe, those who had remained in the south were effectively kept there. There was a certain amount of gene transfer with their neighbors to the north during the next 100,000 years, but there was also some genetic contact with non-European races to the south.

The net result was that when the Cro-Magnon subrace — a tall, ruggedly built, large-headed subrace with a large degree of sexual differentiation — appeared in Europe about 40,000 years ago, it differed to a greater or lesser extent from the various Mediterranean types to the south and southeast.

Variety of Mediterraneans

Some of these Mediterraneans — those who had continued to exchange genes with the northern Europeans during the Wuerm glaciation — can be considered as kinsmen of the Cro-Magnons and as fully White. They differed primarily in being somewhat more gracile (less rugged and angular in bony structure) and in having somewhat smaller heads and narrower faces and jaws.

Others, whose genetic contacts were less with Europe and more with the Middle East and Africa, differed substantially from the Cro-Magnons. Most of these were much shorter (although there were notable exceptions, e.g., in northeast Africa) and more gracile than the Cro-Magnons, pedomorphic, and — judging from their descendants — dark. Their heads were smaller and their facial structure quite different — so different, in fact, that they should not be classified as White.

Racial Classifications

European anthropologists have developed a somewhat involved scheme of racial classification to comprise these non-White Mediterraneans, with groupings designated as Hither Asiatic, Oriental, Hamitic, etc. Since we are concerned only with the ancestors of today’s Whites, we will not become involved further with the subtleties of these groupings but will merely try to indicate whether any particular Mediterranean group should be considered fully White, marginally White, or non-White. Because of the racial mixing which has taken place in the Mediterranean area, with a consequently large number of gradations of racial character, such indications may sometimes be arbitrary.

Neanderthal Period

The period between 150,000 and 40,000 years ago, corresponding to the first Wuerm glacial advance, was the Neanderthal period. There has been a great deal of confusion about Neanderthal Man in the past, based primarily on the fact that the fossil specimens originally taken as typical were not really representative of most Europeans during this period but represented instead a local and rather specialized variation of the race.

The evidence which is available now indicates strongly that the Neanderthal phase was neither a regression nor the result of a major genetic intrusion, but instead was a smooth continuation of developments rooted in the pre-Neanderthal period. Both culturally and biologically a continuum has been established between the northern Europeans of the Riss-Wirerm interglacial period and the more generalized northern Neanderthals of the first Wuerm advance.

A similar continuum joins the southern varieties of Neanderthal Man with the inhabitants of the Mediterranean and Middle Eastern areas during the Riss-Wuerm interglacial.

The more highly specialized Neanderthals — i.e., those with heavy brow ridges, prognathism. and other “regressive” peculiarities — either died out or were absorbed by their neighbors.

Upper Paleolithic

The Cro-Magnon subrace, which was the principal racial element in Europe during the Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic periods — i.e., from about 40,000 years ago until the introduction of farming 6,000-8,000 years ago — is represented today by groups of Upper Paleolithic survivors in Ireland, northern Germany, Scandinavia, and other parts of northern Europe. They were described and pictured in the fourth installment in this series.

The Cro-Magnon homeland may be considered to be the vast northern European plain, stretching from the Alps in the south to the North Sea and the Baltic Sea in the north, and from Ireland in the west to the Urals in the east.

Alpine Subrace

The Alpine subrace, which was described in the fifth installment, has been derived from the Cro-Magnon subrace through a complex of genetic changes involving a reduction in stature, a decrease in relative head length, a slight decrease in sexual differentiation — and, perhaps, some Mediterranean admixture. The Alpine homeland is the mountain belt stretching across western and central Europe – i.e., it is in that region that Alpines have historically constituted the largest portion of the population.

And the various Mediterranean types, whose ancestors developed more or less separately from the Cro-Magnon subrace, have their homelands along the African and European shores of the Mediterranean Sea and in the Middle East.

Population Explosion

When men everywhere lived by hunting, fishing, and gathering natural vegetation, population densities were everywhere quite small: on the order of one person for every five square miles of habitable land. When they began living by farming and raising livestock, however, population densities rapidly increased more than a hundredfold.

We noted in the fifth installment that it was in the Mediterranean racial area, on Europe’s borders rather than in its interior, that the Neolithic revolution began. And, thus, beginning about 9,000 years ago, the Mediterraneans gained a strong numerical advantage over the Cro-Magnons and their Alpine relatives. Several groups of Mediterraneans, representing several varieties, were able to push northward and westward into Europe, initially swamping the sparse hunter-gatherer population.

Even though the Cro-Magnons themselves experienced a population surge when they became farmers, the initial advantage of the Mediterraneans resulted in a lasting Mediterranean numerical dominance in many areas which had formerly been Cro-Magnon. Most areas of Mediterranean penetration became racially mixed, with the ratio of Cro-Magnon to Mediterranean blood varying from place to place.

Tall, Blond Warriors

But the Mediterraneans were not the only ones to invade the Cro-Magnon areas of Europe during the Neolithic period. From the steppes of southern Russia, in the region between the Black Sea and the Caspian, came wave after wave of a subrace which differed from all the others we have encountered thus far. Not quite as ruggedly built as the Cro-Magnons, yet more so than the Mediterraneans, they were tall and fair.

They may have learned the arts of agriculture from earlier contact with a nearby Mediterranean group, or they may have developed farming on their own, but, whichever the case, they were already carrying these arts westward and northwestward with them nearly 6,000 years ago. Superb craftsmen as well as farmers and cattle breeders, they were, above all else, warriors. Wherever they went they conquered and ruled.

Nordics Take Lead

And their culture ruled also. Their language replaced the language of the conquered peoples everywhere, as did also their religion, their art, and their social customs. They were the Nordics.

The Nordics will play the leading role in this series henceforth, just as they have in the world for the past 6,000 years. But let us fix in our minds a few of the more significant general features of the European world of the Neolithic period which we have not considered yet, before we focus our attention on the Nordics.

First Farmers

The Neolithic revolution had reached the northernmost corners of Europe by 6,000 years ago. It brought with it certain changes in stone technology initially, but these were of relatively minor importance compared to the far-reaching social changes accompanying the replacement of the hunting-gathering lifestyle by the farming-livestock raising lifestyle.

As already mentioned, the new lifestyle was more efficient, and it allowed a given area of land to support a much larger population. The most significant social change which came with this higher population density was increased specialization: a much more pervasive and highly structured division of labor than had existed with the Mesolithic or Paleolithic lifestyles.

Interdependence and Innovation

Men ceased being jacks of’ all trades, each dependent entirely on his own efforts or those of his immediate family for his food, his clothing, his shelter, his weapons, and all his other needs. Instead, various individuals specialized in trades, supplying the needs of several families or of a whole village with the fruits of their skilled labors and depending in turn upon individuals in other trades for supplying some of their needs.

There had been a certain amount of specialization among hunter-gatherers, but never before to such an extent. Europeans lost some of their independence with their increased division of labor, but with the new interdependence came an enormously increased rate of cultural innovation. The man who could spend a lifetime doing nothing but making pots had a chance to learn how to do it exceedingly well — much better, at any rate, than his predecessor who had been obliged to spread his attention and his labors over a much broader field of endeavor.

Social Organization

With the division of labor came new divisions of wealth and social status. Social classes came into being: a class of peasants and craftsmen, a class of warrior-rulers, a class of priests. Society became truly organized for the first time.

These new social developments came about first in that part of Europe where the Neolithic lifestyle first took hold. From Crete and the coastal areas of Greece and southern and eastern Italy they had spread by 8,500 years ago to a wide area of southeastern Europe, encompassing all of the Balkan peninsula and extending from the head of the Adriatic Sea the Dniester-Dnieper region northwest of the Black Sea. Included were all of modern Austria, Hungary, and Romania and part of the Ukraine.

Hard-fired pottery was being produced in the Balkans by this time, which was also about when it first appeared in the Middle East, although the most recent findings seem to give precedence to the Balkans. Within another millennium — i.e., by about 7,500 years ago — a complex civilization had sprung up throughout this entire southeastern European area.

This Old European civilization, as it has been recently named, boasted walled towns of more than 1,000 inhabitants (one near Kiev had 20,000), with stone temples and brick houses. Copper objects were being produced at several sites, and a linear script had come into use. This latter development was nearly 2,000 years ahead of a similar development in the Middle East.

Strictly European

Although extensive trade in both raw materials and manufactured products was being carried on with Asia Minor and the Middle East, it should be emphasized that the Old European culture of 7,500 years ago was strictly European and not a Middle Eastern import. The Mediterranean farmers who began spreading from the coastal areas into the Balkan interior 9,000 years ago brought sheep, goats, and barley (which were not indigenous to Europe) with them, but after that initial impulse the Old European culture developed in its own distinctive way, independently of the Middle East.

The Old European civilization lasted about 3,000 years — i.e., until about 5,500 years ago — and then it disintegrated utterly. Its temples and gods, its towns, its language — all disappeared in an overwhelming disaster: the arrival of Bronze Age Nordic warriors from the east.

Lost Civilization

It may seem surprising that so little was known of the Old European civilization until the archaeological findings of the last few years, considering the fact that it flourished so long and reached such heights right in the European heartland. How is it that we know so much more about the ancient civilizations of Mesopotamia and Egypt than about a civilization so much more important to us?

Part of the answer undoubtedly is that the Old European civilization thrived in an area which has been much more exposed to the ravages of time, with armies and migrating streams of people crossing and recrossing it throughout the last 5,500 years, while the ruins of other civilizations have lain abandoned and relatively undisturbed.

Undeciphered Script

And part of the answer lies in the thoroughness of the transformation wrought by the Nordic conquerors of Old Europe. In Egypt, despite invasions by alien peoples from time to time, and despite the gradual racial mongrelization of the Egyptians, there has remained a certain degree of continuity over the last 5,000 years. But of Old Europe there remains hardly a trace above ground.

We are unable to decipher a single Old European inscription , and only in a few modern European place names does any evidence of their language survive, much in the way American Indian place names survive in this country today. Besides the artifacts and fossils now being unearthed by archaeologists, one of our few sources of knowledge of the Old Europeans may lie in the religious myths of the descendants of their conquerors, as we shall soon see.

Room for Dreaming

A tantalizing thought is that the fantasies of writers such as Robert E. Howard, with his Cimmerian hero Conan the Barbarian living, loving, and fighting amid the splendors of a vanished, ancient civilization, become less fantastic the more we learn of Old Europe. During its 3,000 years of efflorescence there may even be room to fit in J.R.R. Tolkien’s Middle Earth and the wonders of Gondor, Rohan, and Mordor!

In any event, our ideas of European prehistory have certainly been stretched during the past few years of discovery.

The creators of the Old European civilization were a blend of the Mesolithic Cro-Magnons originally in the Balkan area and the Neolithic Mediterraneans who infiltrated the area, beginning a little over 8,500 years ago. Most of these Mediterraneans were of a variety anthropologists call Danubian, and they were short, gracile, and pedomorphic.

Because the Cro-Magnon population differed physically in so many respects from the Danubians, there were substantial geographical variations in racial type in Old Europe, depending on the proportions of the two basic stocks present in the blend. When the Nordics arrived, the geographical racial pattern became even more varied. The racial homogeneity which had existed in most of Europe during the Upper Paleolithic period was gone for good.

In the next installment we will consider certain aspects of the interaction between the Nordics and the citizens of Old Europe, and we will also look at the Megalithic culture of Western Europe.

ILLUSTRATIONS

a) NORDICS of today display a range of racial characteristics, the results of mixing with Cro-Magnon and White Mediterranean types — although there are a few areas of Europe with a significant population having the unmixed characteristics of the Battle-Axe People. Above, from left to right: Unmixed Battle-Axe Nordic from New England; Norwegian; Pole, showing Cro-Magnon-Nordic mixture; Fleming, showing mixture of Nordic and partly Alpinized Cro-Magnon.

b) CRETAN GODDESS or priestess of Ivory and gold is 3,700 years old and shows the features of a Mediterranean type which was fully White, having none of the Middle Eastern characteristics of other Mediterranean types often described as “greasy.” The girl who modeled for this statue may be typical of the Mediterranean element in the megalithic people of Western Europe. Even today Crete has more blondness than other Mediterranean areas.

c) SOME of the characters used in the Old European linear script, which predated the earliest known writing in the Middle East. by 2,000 years. A few of the Old European characters are identical to characters in the runic script used in northern Europe as much as 7,000 years later.

The Nordic subrace of the White, or European, race made its first appearance in Europe west of the Black Sea about 6,400 years ago. Before that the Nordics were concentrated in southern Russia and the eastern Ukraine, in the region north of the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea.

At the close of the Ice Age they may have been even further east, in the vast expanse of Turkistan, which stretches 1,500 miles from the Caspian Sea to Mongolia. We cannot speak with certainty about this earlier period, however, because the evidence is very scanty. The earliest origins of the Nordics must remain shrouded in the mists of remote antiquity until the archaeologists and the anthropologists have done more digging, measuring, and dating in this area of western Asia.

Nordic Characteristics

The Nordic subrace is characterized physically both by skeletal features and by pigmentation. The Nordic skull is long, with a high forehead, a narrow nose, and stronger brow ridges and muscular markings (roughened areas of bone where tendons are attached) than occur in the Mediterraneans. Nordics are also taller and more rugged in appearance than Mediterraneans, with heavier bones and a larger degree of sexual differentiation in adults. Their jaws are deeper and stronger than those of Mediterraneans, although not so wide as those of Cro-Magnons.

Skeletally they fall between the Cro-Magnon and Mediterranean extremes in several respects, but they present a unique set of skeletal characteristics of their own. They resemble the early Sumerians, but whether a close Sumerian-Nordic relationship actually exists remains unknown.

Ice Age Blondes

The earliest evidence on the Nordics tells us nothing about their pigmentation, and we can only infer that they were blondes, with light hair and skin and blue or gray eyes, from later evidence. We have good general reasons, however, for believing that all the peoples in Europe at the close of the Ice Age, except those on the southern border, were blondes.

Most of Europe was cold and cloudy at that time, with the surface receiving relatively little sunlight. Thus, the dark pigmentation that protects races which evolved in sunny climates from excessive ultraviolet radiation would have served no useful purpose for Paleolithic Europeans.

It would, in fact, have been a disadvantage, in that it would have hindered the formation of vitamin D in their skin, a process which is energized by the ultraviolet radiation which penetrates the outer layers of skin (which explains why members of dark-skinned races living in northern climates — such as Negroes in New England — are so susceptible to rickets). The evolutionary tendency is to provide enough pigmentation to protect from excessive solar radiation, but not so much as to hinder vitamin D formation.

The Mediterraneans who invaded Europe in Neolithic times had presumably not been there long enough to lose their pigmentation by the time of the first Nordic incursion, and so there would have been a strong contrast in the appearance of the two subraces.

Proto-Indo-European

The Nordic homeland in southern Russia was wetter 7,000 years ago than it is today, and what is now arid steppe was then an area of mixed forest and grassland. The geologic evidence for this agrees well with the linguistic evidence.

Comparative linguists have made substantial efforts to reconstruct the original language of the Nordics, as it was before their dispersal from their homeland. That language, Proto-Indo-European (of which more will be said shortly), had words for oak, birch, fir, elder, elm, ash, aspen, willow, and beech, and fossil seeds of all these species of trees have been found in the homeland region.

Proto-Indo-European also had words for a number of wild animals, among which were aurochs, elk, boar, bear, wolf, fox, beaver, squirrel, and badger; and for the domesticated sheep, ox, cow, pig, and horse. Other Proto-Indo-European words indicated a familiarity with farming, stock breeding, and textile production.

The Nordics were domesticating and riding horses by 6,500 years ago, and shortly thereafter they were using horse-drawn vehicles with wheels.

The oldest Nordic artifacts from southern Russia are of stone. Knives, agricultural tools, and axe heads were made of polished stone, with an extraordinary degree of craftsmanship.

Corded Culture

There are no significant sources of metal ore in the Nordic homeland, and the first Nordic use of metal undoubtedly came from their contact with the people living south of them, in the Caucasus Mountains, where copper was smelted as early as 7,000 years ago. Initially the Nordics acquired copper implements by trade, but by 5,500 years ago they had established their own colonies near the ore supplies of the Caucasus and were themselves engaged in metallurgy. And by this time they were deliberately adding arsenic to their copper, producing a hard, tough arsenical bronze.

Nordic pottery was characteristically decorated with impressions made by winding cord around the wet clay. Archaeologists have, in fact, designated the entire Nordic culture as the Corded Pottery culture.

In southern Russia the Nordics buried their dead (at least those of high rank) in kurgans, or stone burial vaults covered with earth mounds. Study of these graves has provided much information about early Nordic society.

Nordics were, above all else, warriors. Weapons were always the most prominent artifacts buried with them. Next to their weapons in their regard were their horses, and a dead warrior’s horse was often sacrificed and buried with him.

So, too, sometimes were their wives and their slaves. (The Hindu practice of suttee had its origin in the Nordic invasion of India 35 centuries ago.) Both slave sacrifice and the rich burials of some Nordics testify to a highly stratified or hierarchical social structure.

Religious Contrast

The most common symbolism on pottery, amber pendants, and other grave items was solar, confirming the fact that the Nordics were (and always have been) worshippers of the sun and the sky — more generally, of Nature, with an emphasis on its active, male, creative aspect, as epitomized by the life-giving sun. This contrasts sharply with the religious symbolism of the Neolithic society to the west, in Old Europe, with its Mediterranean racial basis; that symbolism was feminine, centered on the female-reproductive aspect of Nature.

The Nordics lived typically in small villages or settlements of only a few timbered houses, an arrangement suited to their need for relatively large amounts of open land for grazing. Though they were settled relatively sparsely in their homeland, the Nordics maintained a high degree of cultural uniformity over a rather large territory, a consequence of the high degree of mobility which their lifestyle conferred upon them.

Conquest of Europe

They erupted into Old Europe in three major waves, beginning about 6,400 years ago and spanning 16 centuries.

The Nordics cut through Old Europe like a hot knife through warm butter. Their first invasion wave carried them as far west as the Rhine. It was a relatively thin wave, however, and it left some areas of Old Europe more or less intact — notably, the western Ukraine — while other areas were totally disrupted and subjugated. Even in the latter areas — such as the region immediately west of the Black Sea, comprising present-day Romania, Bulgaria, Yugoslavia, and Hungary — the Nordics were not numerous enough to replace the Mediterranean population.

Instead, the conquering Nordics of the first wave reduced the Mediterraneans to helots and formed a ruling aristocracy over them. In some cases it was a purely male aristocracy, formed by Nordic warriors who were not accompanied by women and children of their own race but who instead took Mediterranean wives from the conquered areas. Everywhere the conquerors built citadels, usually hill forts, to anchor their conquests.

The Second Wave

The two races and their cultures coexisted in this way for more than 800 years. Then the second wave of Nordics came boiling out of their eastern homeland, about 5,400 years ago, and the last remnants of Old Europe were submerged. The warriors of this second wave brought their women with them, and the racial makeup of Europe began to change more profoundly.

They also brought bronze weapons and implements with them — the first hard metal to appear west of the Black Sea. And they brought a uniformity of culture to Europe which had not existed since the Ice Age. The Old European civilization had developed in a number of distinct, local directions, resulting in different cultures in different areas. The Nordics, with their horses, were much more mobile, and they maintained an active commerce among the various regions under their domination.

Meanwhile, population pressure continued to build up back in the Nordic heartland. The third wave to hit Europe, between 5,000 and 4,800 years ago, was more massive than the first two, and the racial balance was shifted even further toward a Nordic predominance in many areas. In eastern Europe only Crete, the Cyclades, and Greece remained unaffected, with a relatively pure Mediterranean population.

Nordic Dominance

The racial situation in Europe 4,800 years ago, then, was roughly as follows: the Mediterraneans were the principal population element in southwestern Europe and in the aforementioned areas of southeastern Europe. The Nordics were the principal element in southern Russia, from the Urals to the Dniester, which was the old Nordic homeland; and in north-central Europe, north to the Baltic and west to Jutland, which had not been heavily settled prior to the Nordic invasions. In the northern Balkans and along the Danube valley — the former territory of the Old Europeans the population was mixed, with the Nordic-Mediterranean ratio varying from place to place, but with the Nordics socially and politically dominant everywhere.

The detailed racial distribution was actually more complex than the foregoing rough description indicates. Groups of Mediterraneans displaced from their original habitat by one or another of the Nordic waves later amalgamated with Nordics in areas well beyond the bounds of Old Europe. And, of course, there were still areas of predominant Cro-Magnon population, principally in the far north and the far west.

A New Heartland

The process of racial change begun by the Nordic invasions from the east continued long after the invasions ended. They were as decisive in shaping the racial destiny of Europe — and of the planet — as was the Mediterranean invasion of Cro-Magnon Europe 3,000 years earlier. They established a new Nordic heartland in northern Europe — a Nordic heartland from which new invasions would pour forth in the future, transforming southern Europe, as we shall see in future installments in this series.

With the biological changes in Europe came profound cultural and spiritual changes. The two principal subraces involved Nordic and Mediterranean differed even more markedly in their psychical characteristics than they did physically.

In fact, one of the most tantalizing hints of the change wrought in Europe is to be found in the Nordic religious mythology — specifically, Scandinavian mythology — which has come down to us from that time of radical transformation.

Soil-Bound Spirit

The religion of the people of Old Europe, like the religion of every race, was created in their own image, a spiritual reflection of their inner nature. They were farmers, Mediterranean and passive. They were a settled race, and their ties were to the soil.

Although we can decipher none of their religious inscriptions, it seems safe to assume that, like other soil-bound peoples, their religion was centered on the concept of fertility. Certainly, this is suggested by the abundance of female figurines, stylized vulva symbols, and other evidences of a flourishing fertility cult which have been unearthed by archaeologists along with other remnants of the Old European culture.

The abundance of the life-giving soil, the seasonal death and rebirth of the green earth, the mating and birthing of their domestic animals: these were the essential mysteries, and it was around these that the religious concepts of their matriarchal society must have been formed. Theirs was the religion of the Earth Mother.

Warrior Religion

In contrast, the Battle-Axe People, the blond horsemen from the east, the conquerors of Old Europe, were a race on the move. Nordic, active, patriarchal, dominating, they, too, farmed and, bred livestock, but they were far less soil-bound in their outlook than the Mediterraneans. Warriors, explorers, rulers, they were less concerned with the mysteries of plant and animal reproduction and more concerned with valor, honor, and authority. Their spiritual focus was upward and outward, toward the sky and far horizons, rather than downward toward the soil and inward toward their own bodily functions, as in the case of the Mediterraneans. Theirs was the religion of the Sky Father.

The religion of the Scandinavians until a few hundred years ago, when it was forcibly replaced by Christianity, had a pantheon divided into gods and goddesses belonging to two distinct groups, the Aesir and the Vanir. The principal gods among the Aesir — Odin, Thor, and Tyr — are associated with the sky and with manly activities. Both Odin and Tyr were, at different times, assigned the roles of Sky Father and of war god. Thor, the thunderer, was the god of the air, of lightning, and of defense against enemies.

The three principal Vanir — Njord, Frey, and Freya — are, on the other hand, associated with the earth and the sea, with fecundity, and with sexual pleasure. Njord is clearly a masculinized version of Nerthus, the Earth Mother. Frey and Freya personify the male and female sexual principles, respectively.

Ancient Legends

It is very tempting to see in these two disparate groups constituting the Scandinavian pantheon an imperfect blending of the religions of two disparate peoples, the Aesir belonging originally to the Nordic Battle-Axe People and the Vanir to the Neolithic Mediterraneans conquered by the former.

Indeed, the ancient legends speak to us of just such a blending: of a war between the two groups of gods in the dawn of time, followed eventually by a truce and the acceptance by the Aesir of hostages from the Vanir.

The Heimskringla, a semi-historical compendium of the lives of the Norse kings, written early in the thirteenth century by Snorri Sturlason, the great Icelandic poet and historian, begins with the Ynglingasaga, an almost wholly non-historical account of conflict between Aesir and Vanir. In Snorri’s scheme of things the Aesir were the biological ancestors of the Norse kings, and he interprets the racial memory of a long-ago migration of people in this light.

His account correctly places the ancestral home of the Aesir (i.e., of the people whose gods the Aesir were) in the region between the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea, but its geographical and historical details are not to be relied on. According to Snorri:

Vanaheim and Asgard

“North of the Black Sea lies Svithjoth the Great or the Cold (Russia)…. Out of the north, from the mountains which are beyond all inhabited districts, a river runs through Svithjoth whose correct name is Tanais (the Don River). In olden times it was called Tana Fork or Vana Fork. Its mouth is in the Black Sea. The land around the Vana Fork was then called Vanaheim, or Home of the Vanir. This river divides the three continents. East of it is Asia, west of it Europe.
“The land east of the Tana Fork was called Home of the Aesir, and the capital of that country they called Asgard. In this capital the chieftain ruled” whose name was Odin….

“Odin made war on the Vanir, but they resisted stoutly and defended their land. Now the one , now the other was victorious, and both devastated the land of their opponents, doing each other damage. But when both wearied of that they agreed on a peace meeting and concluded a peace, giving each other hostages. The Vanir gave their most outstanding men, Njord the Wealthy and his son Frey….

“Odin appointed Njord and Frey to be priests for the sacrificial offerings, and they were gods among the Aesir. Freya was the daughter of Njord. She was the priestess at the sacrifices. It was she who first taught the Aesir magic such as was practiced among the Vanir….

Invasion and Conquest

“A great mountain chain runs from the northeast to the southwest. It divides Svithjoth the Great from other realms. South of the mountains it is not far to Turkey…. Because Odin had the gift of prophecy and was skilled in magic, he knew that his offspring would inhabit the northern part of the world. Then he set his brothers Ve and Vili over Asgard, but he himself and all gods and many other people departed. First he journeyed west to Garthriki (western Russia) and then south to Saxland (northwestern Germany). He had many sons. He took possession of lands far and wide in Saxland and set his sons to defend these lands. Then he journeyed north to the (Baltic) sea and fixed his abode on an island. That place is now called Odense (Odin’s Island), on the island of Funen.”

Besides Snorri’s tendency to switch the roles of gods and men back and forth, there are other defects in his account. The most serious of these is his chronological sequence of events. Before the migration into Europe even starts, Snorri has already brought about the reconciliation and union of Aesir and Vanir, of Nordic and Mediterranean religions, something which could not have happened until the conquest of the Neolithic-Mediterranean peoples by the Nordics had already taken place.

It is evident that the oral sagas must have undergone significant changes before Snorri began setting them down in writing, In fact, one should be surprised that, after the passage of several millennia, the sagas should still contain any historical truth at all. Nevertheless, the Ynglingasaga does appear to give us a link, however tenuous, between the Scandinavian mythology of seven centuries ago and actual events which took place more than five millennia ago, as indicated by the archaeological evidence.

New Language

The transformation from a matriarchal, egalitarian, pacifist, soil-bound society to a patriarchal, hierarchical, mobile society ruled by warrior chieftains was accompanied by another cultural change of enormous significance — the replacement of the languages of Old Europe by Indo-European languages.

Today, although the Mediterranean race survives in Europe, no Mediterranean language except Basque (Euskarian), spoken by fewer than a million people in the Pyrenees of southern France and northern Spain, is native on European soil. (Georgian and related Mediterranean languages of the Caucasic family may have strayed a few miles across the border from Asia into Europe, but not far enough to be noteworthy. And, of course, we are not counting isolated intruders into Europe who speak Mediterranean languages — such as Hebrew.)

The Esths and the Finns of the eastern Baltic region and the Magyars of Hungary and Romania speak non-Indo-European (and non-Mediterranean) languages of the Uralic family, and there are a number of pockets of speakers of Uralic and Altaic languages in the European portion of the Soviet Union, most of them near the eastern border of Europe with Asia.

Gift of Unity

With these exceptions Indo-European languages are native everywhere in Europe, from Iceland in the west to the Urals in the east and from Tromso in the north to Gibraltar in the south. Beyond this, they are also native in vast areas outside Europe — not only areas of recent White conquest, such as the western hemisphere, Australia, southern Africa, and much of the Asiatic portion of the Soviet Union, but also in such thoroughly non-White areas as Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and India, where the native tongues were replaced by those of their Nordic conquerors thousands of years ago.

It is, of course, a shame that we have not a trace left of the languages spoken by the Cro-Magnon hunters of the Ice Age, and only a few undecipherable scraps left of the languages spoken (and, perhaps, written) by the Mediterranean peoples of Old Europe. Those languages of our White cousins and ancestors are lost to us forever. But the Nordic conquerors of Europe, in those long-ago invasions, though they thoroughly obliterated the indigenous languages of Europe, gave us something immensely valuable in return in the form of linguistic unity over a vast area of the earth’s surface.

Language and Race

It is because of this that 99 per cent of the White people on earth today speak languages which are closely related to one another. The psyche of a race, which is genetically determined, in turn determines the broad outlines of the forms taken by the race’s cultural developments, including language. And the structure of a people’s language certainly plays a major role in that people’s approach to the world around them — ultimately, in their manner and degree of success in coping with the world.

English, Swedish, and German may sound quite different to the ear, but they are, in fact, very close to one another; their structures are the same; they have words for the same concepts; they are used by peoples whose manner of thinking is the same. And they differ radically from any non-Indo-European language, such as Chinese, Hebrew, or Xhosa.

The study of the native language of a people can tell us a great deal about that people; in particular, the study of the Indo-European family of languages can tell us two things: it can tell us about the Nordics in southern Russia 7,000 years ago who spoke Proto-Indo-European — about their lifestyle, the structure of their society, their technological accomplishments, their religious beliefs, and many other aspects of their lives — and it can tell us much about what has happened to them since they left their homeland, settled in other areas, and gradually began speaking new languages which evolved in various ways from Proto-Indo-European.

Indo-European Roots

The efforts of linguists to reconstruct Proto-Indo-European, and a few of the words they have determined were in its vocabulary, have been mentioned briefly above. These efforts are based on a study of related words in different Indo-European languages and on a knowledge of certain rules of language evolution. The linguists have, in effect, traced these related words backward in time to their common roots.

This linguistic detective work is highly technical and is beyond the scope of this series. A couple of the conclusions drawn from it are worth noting, however. One of these conclusions is the geographical delineation of the Nordic homeland. The presence of certain animal and plant words in the Proto-Indo-European vocabulary provide clues about the natural environment which existed in the Nordic homeland: it had to be an area in which the species for which words existed were actually present at the time in. question. The absence of certain animal and plant words provide other clues.

Silver Birch Clue

For example, the original Nordics had a word for the silver birch, a word whose etymological meaning is “the shining, white tree.” Forests of silver birch are not found south of 45 degrees north latitude nor west of the Vistula, which corresponds very roughly to the northern shore of the Black Sea and the western border of the Ukraine. Other vocabulary clues pin the location down further.

The students of Proto-Indo-European believe that the language resulted from the blending of two earlier languages between 7,500 and 6,500 years ago — that is, only shortly before the beginning of the Nordic invasions. And these invasions, of course, led to the splitting of the language into new languages.

Splitting and Branching

The earliest split of Proto-Indo-European was into a western (or “centum”) branch and an eastern (or “satem”) branch. To the western branch belong the Germanic, Celtic, Italic, and Greek languages; to the eastern branch the Baltic, Slavic, Iranian, and Indic languages. (The last two groups of languages are spoken by non-European peoples today, the consequence of prehistoric conquests by Nordics.)

After this initial splitting, further branching has occurred: Germanic has branched into the North Germanic languages (Icelandic, Faeroese, Danish, Norwegian, and Swedish) and the West Germanic languages (German, Dutch, Afrikaans, Flemish, Frisian, and English); Celtic has branched into Welsh, Breton, Irish Gaelic, and Scottish Gaelic; and Italic has branched into Portuguese, Spanish, Catalan, Provencal, French, Italian, Rhaeto-Romanic, Sardinian, and Romanian (to mention only extant languages).

ILLUSTRATIONS

a) NORDIC INVASIONS of Old Europe and adjacent areas of north-western Europe began a radical cultural and racial transformation of Europe 6,400 years ago. Arrows show Nordic thrusts between 6,400 and 4,800 years ago.

b) THE BATTLE-AXE PEOPLE is one of the names which his been applied to the Nordics who swept across Old Europe more than 6,000 years ago, because of their characteristically boat-shaped battle-axes. These axe heads of polished stone show exquisite craftsmanship and represent a peak of Neolithic technology which was unequalled.

Between the Indo-European invasions of Old Europe and adjacent territories, beginning about 6,400 years ago, and the invasions of Greece and Italy 2,500 years later which precipitated the birth of classical civilization, a number of interesting developments took place, both racially and culturally.

The Nordic Indo-Europeans who swept across Neolithic Old Europe also pushed their way deep into Mesolithic areas west and north of the settled region in which farming was an established way of life. And the Nordic invaders were farmers and cattle-breeders as well as warriors. While their advent toppled the Mediterranean civilization of Old Europe everywhere except in the Aegean islands, Crete, Greece, and southeastern Italy, at the same time it introduced the food-producing lifestyle to the farthest corners of northwestern Europe.

Nordic Preemption

Northwestern Europe would certainly have switched from the Mesolithic to the Neolithic lifestyle around 6,000 years ago in any event, because the new and a vastly more efficient lifestyle was sweeping inexorably northward just as fast as the gradually changing climate would allow. But, had the Nordics not invaded the area at this time, it would have been Mediterraneans rather than Nordics who brought the change. Then the relatively empty spaces of the north would have acquired a Mediterranean population base.

As it was, a new Nordic heartland was soon established in Scandinavia and the Baltic-North Sea area, profoundly influencing the further development of all western and central Europe. Just as the Mediterraneans had earlier swamped the food-gathering Mesolithic population of the Balkan peninsula by having a lifestyle which allowed the land to support a much higher density of population, so the Nordic invaders of the north and northwest greatly expanded their numbers there within a short time, preempting any further Mediterranean expansion.

Failure to Kill

In most instances the Nordics did not kill off the indigenous populations of the Mediterranean-occupied areas they conquered, leaving the land empty for themselves. Instead they enslaved the natives, establishing themselves as a ruling aristocracy.

Thus, only in those areas of Mediterranean settlement which received a very substantial Nordic influx was there a significant change in the racial character of the population. Elsewhere the Nordics imposed their Indo-European language, their religion, and other elements of their culture on the Mediterranean population and then gradually sank from sight into the numerically greater Mediterranean substratum as interbreeding took its toll.

In the north, however, things proceeded differently. For one thing, the largely Cro-Magnon population there was quite sparse, as was always the case where a food-gathering economy prevailed. Secondly, the Cro-Magnon race was not as amenable to being enslaved as was the Mediterranean race — even if there had been enough of them to support a Nordic ruling class with their labors.

Organic Development

The development in the north, therefore, was much more organic than in the conquered lands to the south: Nordics became not only the ruling aristocracy, but the peasantry as well. They blended with the Cro-Magnons, producing local populations which varied from mostly Nordic to mostly Cro-Magnon, but with the Nordic element eventually predominating in most areas.

This transformation of northwestern Europe took place over a period of many centuries, and all its details are by no means clear to prehistorians yet. One outstanding development during this period was the erection of megalithic structures in many areas of western Europe (megalith: “large stone”). Massive blocks of stone, some weighing more than 100 tons, were used to build collective tombs and open-air temples, from the Orkney Islands in the north to Malta in the south.

Megalithic Technology

Megalithic structures vary significantly in style in different areas. Most of those in the north, as well as many in the south, involve little or no quarrying or artificial shaping of stone, but instead are constructed of naturally occurring stones. Even when artificial means were used to bring stones to the approximate size and shape desired by the builders, in most cases no careful dressing or fine smoothing was done. Nevertheless, a remarkable degree of technological skill is revealed by a study of megalithic remains.

Stonehenge, the celebrated megalithic temple and observatory in southern Britain, although it is exceptional in some ways, provides excellent insight into several aspects of life in northwestern Europe in the period following the first Indo-European arrival there.

The impressive stone monument which we think of today as Stonehenge was constructed about 4,100 years ago. It stands on the site of earlier constructions of similar purpose, however, which may be as much as 200 years older.

Structure of Stonehenge

In its final form, 4,100 years ago, Stonehenge consisted of two concentric circular and two semicircular arrays of standing stone slabs, ranging in weight from less than five tons to more than 50 tons, plus half-dozen or so other large stones outside the circular arrays. The whole was surrounded by a circular bank, flanked by a ditch on the outside, approximately 100 yards in diameter.

There were 80 or so stones of the five-ton size, arranged inside a circle of 30 much larger stones, averaging about 25 tons, which were capped with a ring of lintel stones weighing about seven tons each. The diameter of the ring was just under 100 feet. Finally, inside that ring was a semicircle of 15 very large stones, some weighing more than 50 tons and standing nearly 30 feet high. These last were arranged in groups of three (trilithons), each consisting of two uprights joined by a lintel.

Today many of the original stones are missing, having been removed to be used for other purposes in past centuries, their former presence attested only by the holes in which they once stood. Others have fallen over. All are badly weathered and scarred by the passage of more than 40 centuries.

Remarkable Feat

Originally, however, Stonehenge was a work of exceptional order, precision, and craftsmanship. Unlike most megaliths, the stones of Stonehenge were carefully shaped. The lintel stones were fitted to the uprights they capped by mortise and tenon, precisely cut into the exceptionally hard material.

The heavy slabs of stone were carried to their destination as far as 240 miles over land and water. They were erected with a precision that resulted in a maximum error of only four inches in the positions of stones in a 100-foot circle. It is estimated that 1.5 million man-days of labor were required in the building of Stonehenge — quite a feat of management, logistics, and engineering for those days.

Solar Observatory

Even more impressive, however, is the purpose for which Stonehenge was used. The alignments of the trilithons and other stones in the structure prove conclusively that it was laid out precisely to facilitate the ritual observation of certain astronomical events: sunrise and sunset on the days of the summer and winter solstices and the vernal and autumnal equinoxes, and the northerly and southerly limits of the moon’s rather more complex pattern of rising and setting. There is also evidence that Stonehenge was used as a rather sophisticated astronomical computer to predict solar and lunar eclipses.

White “Barbarians”

Until a few years ago most prehistorians took it for granted that the builders of Stonehenge — and of all other megalithic structures in western Europe — copied earlier megalithic models in the eastern Mediterranean. Some believed that Mediterranean immigrants to northwestern Europe carried their skills with them, while others held that it was only the knowledge itself which had traveled northwestward, but all agreed that the White “barbarians” of Europe couldn’t possibly have managed a feat like Stonehenge by themselves. It had to have been done — or, at least, the know-how furnished —by some Levantines, some clever Semites.

Such an assumption followed naturally from the Judeo-Christian bias of the 19th century, a century which was still greatly under the influence of the Old Testament, with its Middle Eastern locale: all human culture originated in the Garden of Eden and spread out from there.

Radiocarbon Dating

Even with the advent of radiocarbon dating in 1949, the notion of cultural diffusion from the Middle East was maintained by many. It was not until the calibration of radiocarbon dates against the absolute tree-ring calendar in the late 1960’s that the insidious tyranny of the ex oriente lux (light from the East) doctrine was finally overthrown.

This recent revolution in prehistoric dating and the changes it caused in our understanding of the roles of various races in the cultural developments upon which our civilization rests is so important that it deserves a brief excursus.

Radiocarbon dating depends upon the presence in all living organisms of a radioactive isotope of carbon, C-14. This radioisotope is formed in the atmosphere (primarily in the stratosphere) as a consequence of cosmic ray bombardment.

Neutrons freed from atmospheric atoms by cosmic rays combine with the nitrogen of the air to cause a nuclear reaction which yields carbon of atomic mass number 14 (naturally occurring carbon atoms have mass numbers of 12 and 13). The C-14 nucleus is unstable, and it decays into nitrogen again by emitting a beta particle (electron). The rate of decay is such that exactly half the atomic nuclei in any given sample of C-14 will emit electrons and become non-radioactive nitrogen nuclei in a period of 5,600 years.

Carbon Equilibrium

Meanwhile, however, the C-14 being continually formed in the upper atmosphere combines with atmospheric oxygen to form radioactive carbon dioxide, which diffuses throughout the atmosphere and enters into the respiration of plant life, along with it non-radioactive carbon dioxide. Eventually an equilibrium is reached, with the proportion of C-14 to C-12 and C-13 reaching a constant value in all living organisms, which undergo a continuous exchange of carbon with the environment.

When an organism dies, however, respiration ceases. If the dead organism (or portion of an organism) does not undergo organic decomposition, then the proportion of C-14 in it will gradually decline, with a half-life of 5,600 years. Such is the case with charcoal, for example. Likewise, wood is sometimes preserved for quite a while after it has died. The prehistorian can often determine the age (i.e., the time since death occurred) of a bit of charcoal or wood or other carbonaceous material of organic origin by measuring its radioactivity — that is, its relative C-14 content.

Good to 50,000 Years

If, for example, the activity is half that of a living sample, then the time since death has been 5,600 years. If the activity is down to one-eighth, then the age is 16,800 years (three half-lives). Reasonably accurate measurements can be made out to about eight or ten half-lives (50,000 years or so).

The technique of radiocarbon dating has been greatly refined since 1949 and has become an invaluable tool for prehistorians, since a presumptive date can be established, with a relatively small margin of error, for any prehistoric site from which a piece of charcoal or wood can be recovered. Until the late 1960’s, however, the technique suffered from a major flaw: it depended critically upon the assumption that the cosmic ray bombardment of the earth’s atmosphere has not varied significantly in the last 50,000 years. That assumption turned out to be incorrect.

Tree-Ring Chronology

The discovery that the relative abundance of C-14 in the earth’s atmosphere has fluctuated in the past was made by measuring the C-14 content of very old samples of wood whose exact age was known from a count of seasonal growth rings.

In particular, the bristlecone pine, a very slow-growing and long-lived tree native to parts of the western United States, has some living specimens which are more than 4,000 years old — the oldest living things on earth. Only the outermost layer of these trees is alive, however. The inner layers died off over the millennia, one layer per year.

By counting growth rings inward from the living layer on a core plug taken from such a tree, the absolute age of any given layer of the wood can be determined exactly. A measurement of its C-14 activity then provides a calibration correction for any other sample, anywhere in the world, with the same C-14 activity.

Prehistory Pushed Back

By matching up sections of the growth-ring patterns of living bristlecone pines with sections of the patterns in even older specimens from long-dead trees, an absolute chronology stretching back nearly 8,000 years has now been established. When applied to sites in northwestern Europe of the megalithic period, the effect of the new tree-ring calibration is to push radiocarbon dates back about 500 years. Thus, a radiocarbon age of 3,600 years for Stonehenge has been corrected to 4, 100 years.

Other megalithic henge-type remnants in western Europe date back more than 5,600 years, and there are megalithic stone tombs in Brittany more than 6,000 years old. The oldest massive-stone structures in the Mediterranean region, the Egyptian pyramids, are about 4,700 years old. And the megalithic tombs of Malta and Crete, which were once thought to have been the models for similar tombs in northwestern Europe, are many centuries younger.

Megalithic cultural diffusion, if it took place at all, was from northwest to southeast, not the other way.

Megalithic Race

For us the most interesting question is the racial character of the megalith builders of western Europe. Actually, the remains found in the megalithic tombs belong to a range of subracial types. If there is any single common denominator it is a type which has been named Atlanto-Mediterranean.

But the Atlanto-Mediterranean was not at all Mediterranean, in the sense that the short, gracile inhabitants of the Middle East and the Mediterranean coastal regions were. He was much taller , more rugged skeletally, and less pedomorphic. The word “Mediterranean” is part of his name only because it was earlier assumed that the megalith builders had to be Mediterraneans, who traveled by sea from the eastern Mediterranean through the Strait of Gibraltar and up the Atlantic coast to Brittany, Britain, and Scandinavia.

The Atlanto-Mediterraneans, in fact, were derived from the two basic subracial stocks of northern Europe: the Cro-Magnons, who had been there for 35,000 years; and the Nordics, who began arriving just before the beginning of the megalithic period. This conclusion is supported by everything we know about the megalithic society of northwestern Europe.

Indo-European Traits

It was, in the first place, not a typically Mediterranean society. It was, as indicated by Stonehenge, a society of sun-worshippers, a typically Indo-European trait. And it was a hierarchical society ruled by warrior-chieftains, as indicated by the rich grave goods, including bronze weapons, found in megalithic tombs. Again, this indicates Indo-European rather than Mediterranean influences.

Of course, the racial situation in megalithic Europe was fairly complex, and it was by no means uniform. Some Mediterraneans undoubtedly found their way into northwestern Europe and formed an element in the megalithic population. But they probably came by land, from the portions of central and southeastern Europe disrupted by the Indo-European invasions from beyond the Black Sea, rather than by sea.

No Mediterranean Import

The Nordics did not, by any means, fill up all of northwestern Europe and convert the entire region into a new Nordic homeland. Mediterranean groups were observed in this part of Europe by the Romans (the Silures of Wales, described by Tacitus as having dark complexions and curly hair, were one such group).

But it is clear that the megalithic culture was a native European development and not an import from the Mediterranean.

Northwestern Europe was not the only region on which Indo-European warriors exerted a decisive influence. We shall soon follow their expeditions of conquest and culture-building into prehistoric Italy, Greece, and India.

ILLUSTRATIONS

a) STONEHENGE ruins have survived 4, 100 years, and they still bear witness to the genius and industry of the people who designed and built the world’s first astronomical observatories, of which Stonehenge Is the foremost example. The sun-worshipping Indo-Europeans pioneered the use of massive blocks of stone for their temples and tombs.

b) OLDEST LIVING thing on earth is this bristlecone pine in California’s White Mountains. When Stonehenge was built it was a tiny, green sapling. When Caesar’s legions conquered Gaul and Britain it was already 2,000 years old. It has provided us with a precise and dependable tool for dating the prehistory of our race as far back as 8,000 years.

c) MEGALITHIC TOMBS dot the countryside In northwestern Europe. This one, In Denmark, was built at about the time of Stonehenge. Others date back another 2,000 years.

From the far north they came, the xanthoi, the golden-haired ones: tall, blue-eyed and grey-eyed giants, on horseback and on foot, carrying their battleaxes and their spears, bringing their women and their wagons and their cattle. Warrior-farmers, craftsmen and traders, they worshipped the shining Sky Father and spoke an Indo-European language. They were the Greeks.

The Greeks — or Hellenes, as they later called themselves — crashed down upon the Mediterranean world in a long sequence of waves. The first wave, a relatively weak one — and more properly described merely as Indo-European rather than as specifically Greek — hit about 5,100 years ago, and it apparently took a roundabout course, passing first from the north into western Asia Minor, and thence, by way of the Cyclades and other islands of the southern Aegean, westward into Crete and Greece.

Bronze Age

That first wave introduced metal tools and weapons to the Neolithic culture existing at that time in Crete and on the Greek mainland and laid the basis for the later rise of the Bronze Age Minoan-Mycenaean civilization. It was one of the far-flung arms of the last, great wave of Indo-European migration into central and western Europe from the ancient Indo-European heartland north and east of the Black Sea.

The invaders made a decisive cultural impact on the Aegean world. The archaeological evidence from that period shows a marked break between the nearly static Neolithic tradition which had existed prior to the first Indo-European arrivals and the subsequent Bronze Age cultures.

These later cultures — called Early Cycladic, Early Minoan, and Early Helladic in the Cyclades, Crete, and the Greek mainland respectively — arose rather abruptly about 5,100 years ago and underwent rapid developments in technology, craftsmanship, and social organization.

Blue-eyed Cycladeans

In the Cyclades this first, thin wave of Indo Europeans had a racial as well as a cultural impact. Small marble figurines from the Early Cycladic period still show traces of the pigments with which they were colored, indicating they were made by a red-headed, blue-eyed race.

On Crete and the Greek mainland, however, the Nordic newcomers soon were completely absorbed into the Mediterranean population. The Minoan art of later periods depicts brunet Mediterranean types only.

That Mediterranean population in the Aegean was related to the one which had been overrun farther north, in the Danube valley and the Balkans, by other Indo-Europeans. Shorter than the Nordic Indo-Europeans, darker and more gracile, the Mediterraneans of Crete and Greece were conservative farmers, slow to change their ways, relatively passive and unwarlike. They spoke a non-Indo-European language, the only traces of which remain today are some Greek place-names and a few inscriptions in the undeciphered “Linear A” script. For the time being, however, they kept both their language and their religion; the first Indo-European wave was too thin to change those.

The bulk of the Indo-Europeans in those early invasions from beyond the Black Sea settled in the relatively empty spaces of the far north, along the shores of the Baltic Sea and the North Sea, in Germany, the Baltic states, and Scandinavia, where they established a new Nordic heartland. A thousand years later they began boiling out of this new heartland in wave after wave, heading south. The Romans — themselves the descendants of one of these waves — would later refer to the German-Scandinavian area as vagina gentium, the womb of nations.

But the Greeks came first, through the Cyclades again into Crete about 4,100 years ago, and overland from the north 100-200 years later. The wave which struck Crete provided the impetus for the building of the great Minoan civilization on the basis which had been laid a thousand years earlier by the first Indo-Europeans to reach that part of the world.

Will to Order

The Minoan civilization was in its essence, however, much more a Mediterranean than a Nordic civilization. The Greeks did not bring civilization to Crete; they brought only the tendency toward civilization and the capacity for building it inherent in the higher human type which they represented.

They brought an innovative spirit and the Nordic will to order, and they imposed that will on the essentially passive and egalitarian Mediterranean society they found, reorganizing it along hierarchical lines. Thus, they established the stratified social basis necessary for the emergence of civilization, and they also provided the ruling stratum.

The same pattern was repeated over and over again, not just in the Mediterranean world, but wherever Nordics encountered other races, whether in Iran or India: the Nordics would conquer the non-Nordic natives of a region and establish themselves as a ruling aristocracy over the vanquished people. This freed the Nordic stratum from the necessity of manual labor and gave free rein to the Nordic creative spirit. Rapid cultural innovation followed.

Mixing and Retrogression

But inevitably racial mixing occurred, sometimes soon and sometimes later. The Nordics would disappear into the mass, and the civilization they had created would lose its vital spark, stagnating and eventually retrogressing, although it might coast for centuries on its momentum after the disappearance of the Nordic element before retrogression set in. (Racemixing and retrogression were avoided only when the Nordics exterminated the non-Nordic natives of an area instead of merely conquering them. But then there was left no large serf-class for the maintenance of a culturally innovative aristocracy.)

In some areas this process occurred more than once; a new wave of Nordic conquerors would revitalize the decayed remnant of a civilization established by an earlier wave. If this happened often enough, or if later waves were stronger numerically, there might be an appreciable cumulative effect, both racially and culturally.

As indicated above, the first two Nordic waves to hit Crete were not strong enough to change the basic character of the population there; the Minoan civilization was Mediterranean in its essence, retaining both a Mediterranean religion and language until the impact of later Nordic waves on the Greek mainland took effect and that effect had spread to Crete.

Rise of Mycenae

The Greeks who invaded the mainland around 2000-1900 B.C. took over an area strongly under Minoan influence and gave it a new character — still partly Minoan, but now also partly Greek. The strongest center of Greek influence on the mainland was Mycenae, and on this center a new civilization arose in the l6th century B.C. Despite the lack of any real literature, it reached greater cultural heights than any previously achieved by man.

In social organization, in architecture, in sculpture and metalwork and ceramics, and in the other arts of civilization the Mycenaean Greeks totally eclipsed the Cretans. The artistic treasures unearthed from the ruins of Mycenae by German archaeologist Heinrich Schliemann in the 19th century astounded the world.

Conquest of Crete and Troy

Early in the 14th century B.C. the Mycenaeans also eclipsed Crete politically, invading that island and subduing it.

A little over a century later — around 1250 B.C. — the Mycenaeans also subdued Troy, in northwestern Asia Minor. The conflict between Mycenae and Troy is the subject of Homer’s great epic, the Iliad.

Troy itself was, at that time, also a Greek city, and had been for 700 years. An earlier city on the same site, essentially Mediterranean and Minoan in character, had been conquered and rebuilt by Greek invaders in part of the same wave that entered the Greek mainland just after 2000 B.C.

The language of the Mycenaeans was Greek — i.e., Indo-European rather than Mediterranean — as attested by inscriptions in “Linear B,” the earliest written form of Greek, found at Mycenae and other sites under Mycenaean control.

Social Structure

Their social structure was also Indo-European. Each realm was headed by a king or prince (wanax), sometimes with a separate military leader (lawagetas) and sometimes with the wanax himself fulfilling this function. Then came the landed nobility (hequetai), the professional military class, who were aristocrat-farmers in time of peace. Under them were the free craftsmen and farmworkers. Finally came the serfs, the conquered non-Greeks.

A portion of the produce of the land was given to the king as a tax, allowing him to build up a reserve which, in time of war, could be used to support his army. In time of peace it supported craftsmen and artists, who did much of their work directly for the king.

Greek architecture of the second millennium B.C. also reflected the northern origins of the Mycenaean Greeks. Their settlements were built around strongly fortified citadels and surrounded by defensive walls, contrasting with the unprotected villages of the unwarlike Mediterraneans.

Megaron Palaces

The typical dwelling of the Greek nobleman introduced into the area by the northern invaders had as its principal component the megaron, a large, rectangular hall with a central hearth. These halls were similar to those which had been built by Indo-Europeans elsewhere for thousands of years — and which were still being built in northern Europe thousands of years later, in the time of Beowulf and on into the Middle Ages.

The graves and tombs found at Mycenae and other Greek sites contained bronze swords, daggers, and battleaxes, and gold jewelry and utensils, all of exceptionally high craftsmanship and all testifying to the wealth and the martial lifestyle of the Greek upper classes.

Burial itself, however, was a Mediterranean characteristic. The adoption of burial in the place of the original Greek practice of cremation was only one of many ways in which the invading Greeks of that early era were influenced by the Mediterranean natives.

One of the profoundest cultural interactions between northern invaders and southern natives, and one which shows with special clarity the racial differences in outlook and psychology between Hellenes and Pelasgians (as the Hellenes called the native Mediterraneans), involved religion. By the beginning of the historical period in Greece (around 650 B.C.), when we have our first extensive written references to religious matters (the “Linear B” inscriptions, dating back to 1300 B.C., were far too scanty to yield much insight in this regard), “Greek” religion was already a nearly inseparable blend of Hellenic and Pelasgian elements. Even Homer’s tales of a period six centuries earlier contain references to Greek gods who were no longer purely or exclusively Indo-European.

Olympian Pantheon

Nevertheless, it is still possible to analyze the religion of the Greeks of the historical period into Hellenic and non-Hellenic components. When the Hellenes first came to Greece, they brought with them an Olympian pantheon created in their own image, both physically and psychically. Their gods, with one notable exception (Poseidon, the black-haired sea god), were described by Homer as golden-haired and ivory-skinned.

In behavior, the gods were as human as their creators: sometimes bold and sometimes hesitant, sometimes forthright and sometimes devious, sometimes generous and forgiving, and sometimes stingy and vindictive — but never mysterious.

Altogether, the Olympian religion was a remarkably sharp reflection of the Hellenic spirit and Hellenic life. Even the legendary home assigned to their gods by the Greeks of the historical period, Mt. Olympus, lay far to the north of the centers of Greek civilization, reflecting their own northern origins.

Sky Father

At the head of the Olympian pantheon was Zeus, the Sky Father. His name was derived from an Indo-European root which means “the Shining One.” His counterparts existed in the religions of all the other Indo-European peoples, whose characteristic spiritual orientation is upward and outward. The inherent Indo-European religious tendency has always been, in a sense, solar, even when the sun was not explicitly regarded as a deity.

And Zeus, in his relations with his family of gods and goddesses, perfectly reflected the essentially masculine spirit and the patriarchal structure of all natural and healthy Indo-European societies.

Pelasgian religion was, on the contrary, chthonic (embedded in the earth) in its orientation, feminine in its spirit, matriarchal in its structure. The gods and goddesses of the Pelasgians were mysterious, subterranean creatures, headed by the Earth Mother, who has homologues in the religions of most other Mediterranean peoples.
The Pelasgian tendency, in contrast to the universality of Zeus and his fellow Olympians, was to localize their deities. Thus, while the concept of an Earth Mother was widespread among the Mediterranean peoples, she tended to be given various attributes in various areas, much as the various Virgin Mary cults of the Christian era, with their localized Our Lady of this or that.

The Pelasgians’ deities were concerned, above all else, with sexual reproduction, and they were worshipped in orgiastic rites and with much sexual symbolism. Snakes and bulls, for example, the former both phallic and chthonic, the latter a symbol of reproductive potency, played a major role in Minoan religion.

Religious Interaction

From the first contact between Hellenes and Pelasgians, there was an interaction between their religions, with each race over the course of time adopting and adapting elements from the religion of the other. Thus, for example, the Cretans adopted Zeus and adapted him as a youthful fertility god, portraying him sometimes as a bull, whose role was to fertilize the Earth Mother. They even claimed Crete as the birthplace of Zeus, thus provoking the indignation of the Hellenes, who already regarded the Cretan Pelasgians as an especially deceitful and untrustworthy people.

More interesting to us is the influence of Pelasgian religion on that of the Hellenes. Some Mediterranean deities were adopted into the Olympian family and modified to suit their new relatives, while some Olympians acquired certain Mediterranean attributes. Black-haired Poseidon has already been mentioned.

But even as Hellenic a deity as Athena, the gray-eyed goddess of wisdom, daughter of Zeus, was adapted from a variant of the Pelasgian fertility goddess already localized in Attica when the Hellenes arrived, a sort of Our Lady of Athens. Even after she was adopted by the Olympians and universalized, she retained some of the essence of a local goddess.

Dionysus is an example of a god who came to be worshipped by both Hellenes and Pelasgians, but whose cult was much more Pelasgian than Hellenic in character, involving orgiastic rites.

Hera, the wife of Zeus, is clearly an adopted and modified variant of the Mediterranean Earth Mother.

Greek mythology accounts for this dual nature and dual origin of the gods in a way remarkably reminiscent of the Scandinavian religious tradition of a war between Indo-European gods (Aesir) and Mediterranean gods (Vanir), after which hostages were exchanged (see installment 7, in the January 1979 issue of National Vanguard). The hostages from among the Vanir went to live in Asgard with Odin and the other Scandinavian gods and eventually came to be accepted on equal terms with the Aesir.

Poseidon and Njord

These adopted Vanir included Frey and Freya, the personifications respectively of the male and female sexual principles, and Njord, a masculinized version of Nerthus, which was one of the names of the Earth Mother. It is interesting to note that Njord also doubled as the Scandinavian version of Poseidon.

In Greek tradition Zeus overthrew an older group of gods, the children of Gaia, the Earth Mother, before securing his own role as Sky Father and supreme deity. Just as in the case of the Scandinavians it is very tempting to see in this tradition a mythologized reference to the ancient conflict between invading Indo-Europeans and conquered Mediterraneans.

Because the Mediterraneans were only conquered and not exterminated; because they formed the bulk of the economic base on which Greek society rested; because the lifestyle of Hellenes themselves changed, becoming more dependent on agriculture than before; and because race mixture inevitably followed conquest, it is not surprising that the religion of the conquerors underwent a change and assimilated many elements from the religion of the conquered natives.

Clouded Mirror

A people’s religion generally reflects the essential elements of the race-soul of that people, but it is only under completely natural conditions, free from extraneous cultural and racial intrusions, that the reflection is perfect. Whenever a mixing of diverse peoples occurs, the mirror of the soul is clouded; likewise, when a religion of alien origin is imposed on a people, even without racial mixture.

In the latter case the genetic spiritual predispositions remain unchanged and will eventually reassert themselves. Often this reassertion may take many centuries, because the magnet of the soul’s compass is not as strong as we might wish; a long period is required for it to settle down and find its true direction again after it is jarred.

Protestants and Catholics

When Christianity came to Europe from the Middle East, it was imposed on a racially diverse population, largely Nordic in the north, Mediterranean in the south, Alpine between. Although the religion was modified in an attempt to adapt it to the European psyche, tensions inevitably developed, because this psyche was not everywhere the same.

It should be no surprise that when the rupture came, it divided Europe largely into Protestant North and Catholic South, although a number of political quirks marred the neatness of the geographical division. And in the South the Earth Mother reigned again, in a new guise. (The foregoing should not be read as a slight upon the Indo-European pedigree of any individual with a Catholic background. For 500 years, in the Middle Ages, all Europeans, north and south, were Catholics. Christianity was, in many instances, propagated by fire and sword, and the confessional division of Europe following the Reformation was determined by similar means. As mentioned, there were many quirks and vagaries in this division, especially those which left Catholic enclaves in the North; Ireland and Poland are only two examples. Nevertheless, the phenomenon of reversion to inherently determined forms is quite real, and it is reflected in the generally stronger tendency to Catholicism and Mariolatry in the areas of Europe with a predominantly Mediterranean population.)

In the next installment we will look at the last waves of Greek-speaking Indo-Europeans to invade the Mediterranean world; we will see the rise of Classical Greece; and we will then move on to the Italian peninsula and the beginnings of Rome.

ILLUSTRATIONS

a) GREECE and the Aegean.

b) NORDIC-MEDITERRANEAN racial contrast is reflected in the gods themselves. The vase on the left is decorated with a mask of Dionysus, a god worshipped by the Mediterranean natives in frenzied, orgiastic rites. Because of his popularity with the Mediterraneans, Dionysus was looked down on by Homer’s Hellenic heroes. Athena, on the other hand, referred to in the Iliad by Homer as “gray-eyed Athena,” was a dignified favorite of the Nordic Hellenes. Her bronze head (right) is blackened by the passage of 24 centuries, but the gray enamel on her irises is still intact.

c) MYCENAE’S “Lion Gate” was one of the sites of Schliemann’s excavation in the 3,500-year-old Hellenic city. From Mycenae, King Agamemnon’s armies sailed to battle the Trojans In the 13th century B.C.

d) EXCAVATED ruins of Troy. Also built by Indo-Europeans, Troy was a rival of Mycenae.

e) GOLDEN death mask found in the ruins of Mycenae. When German archaeologist Heinrich Schliemann dug up this mask in the 19th century, he telegraphed the king of Greece: “Today I have looked upon the face of Agamemnon.” Actually, mask is 300 years older than Agamemnon.

Greece was invaded by Greek-speaking Northerners several times during prehistory. Those who arrived in the period 2,100-1,900 B.C. founded the great Mycenaean civilization, which flourished from the end of the l6th century until about 1,200 B.C.

Homer, whose Iliad and Odyssey describe Mycenaean Greece, refers to the Greeks, or Hellenes, inclusively as “Achaeans.” In fact, however, the Achaeans were only one of the Hellenic tribes which were in Greece in Mycenaean times.

Aeolians and Ionians

In addition to the Achaeans, who occupied most of the Peloponnesus (the southern peninsula of Greece, in which Mycenae was located), there were the Aeolians and the Ionians, who occupied other portions of the mainland, many of the Aegean islands, and the west coast of Asia Minor. The Ionians, in particular, settled in Attica and were the founders of Athens.

These tribal divisions apparently predate the arrival of the first Hellenes in Greece, and it seems likely that the Achaeans, Aeolians, and Ionians invaded the Aegean region separately, over a period of several centuries.

And there were also the non-Greek Pelasgians, the Mediterranean aborigines, who occupied the lowest stratum of Greek society and substantially outnumbered the Hellenes in Mycenaean times. As pointed out in the last installment, the Mycenaean Greeks were influenced culturally by these Mediterraneans — and, as time passed, racially as well.

Divine-Born Heroes

In the late 14th and early 13th centuries B.C. more Greek-speaking Indo-Europeans arrived, coming westward across the Aegean in ships. They were Homer’s “divine born” heroes, the fathers and grandfathers of the warriors who sacked Troy about 1,250 B.C.: golden-haired Achilles, the sons of Atreus, and the other princes and kings of the Iliad. They settled in Greece, founded dynasties, and lived in a manner remarkably like that of northern Europe’s feudal lords more than 20 centuries later.

A couple of generations after the fall of Troy — exactly 80 years afterward, according to Greek tradition — a new group of divine-born warriors swept down on Greece, this time from the north. They were the Heraclidae, the supposed descendants of the blond demigod Hercules, and with them came the Dorians, the last of the major Hellenic tribes to reach the Aegean region.

Dorian Invasion

The Dorians, who had settled in central Greece a few years earlier, proceeded to conquer the Achaeans, occupy the Peloponnesus, and extinguish Mycenaean civilization. But, in so doing, they prepared the way for the rise of a new civilization which would greatly surpass the old one.

The Dorian invasion was actually a more complex phenomenon than the preceding lines might suggest. It involved repeated interactions with other peoples on a protracted journey which, although generally southward, included a number of detours, loops, and rest stops. And their legendary leaders, the Heraclidae, had already been south once before, prior to the Trojan war.

It also involved the displacement of other peoples, and it came during a period when lesser Greek-speaking tribes were undertaking invasions of their own to the south. Displaced Achaeans, Aeolians, and Ionians migrated to new areas, sometimes displacing those people already there and sometimes amalgamating with them.

Blond but Rude

The Dorians were blonder than the Achaeans they conquered, but that is only because the Achaeans had been mixing with the Mediterranean aborigines for several centuries before the Dorians arrived; originally the two tribes had been of the same racial composition.

But the Achaeans were certainly more civilized than the rude, new arrivals from the north, and it was 400 years before Greece recovered from the cultural shock of the Dorian invasion. When the civilization of Classical Greece bloomed in the seventh century B.C., it comprised some elements of the old, Mycenaean culture and some which were the consequence of the social, political, and demographic changes wrought by the newcomers.

Dark Age

The four centuries between the Dorian invasion and the flowering of the literate Classical civilization are referred to by most historians as “the Dark Age,” for much the same reasons that the period between the fall of Rome, more than 15 centuries later, and the flowering of Mediaeval civilization is also called “the Dark Ages.”

In both cases a people of an older civilization, who had begun to succumb to racial mixing and decadence, was overwhelmed by a more vigorous and racially healthier but culturally less advanced people from the north. And in both cases a period of gestation took place over a dozen generations or so, during which a synthesis of old and new elements, racial and cultural, occurred, before a new and different civilization arose from the ruins of the old.

Historians’ Bias

Unfortunately, most historians tacitly assume that the records of political and cultural activity which have come down to us from periods of civilized literacy provide all the data needed to yield an understanding of the historical process. The state of development and degree of organization and complexity of city life are taken as a yardstick by which to evaluate the significance or historical importance of a particular period. And if one’s standards of value are geared to such things as the volume of commerce, the gross national product, or even the intensity of scientific, literary, and artistic activity, such a yardstick may seem, at first glance, to be proper.

Racial Values

But there are other standards of value, such as those of the National Alliance, which differ somewhat from the customary ones. For it is not in the external forms of organization and activity of a people that we see the most important criteria for making a judgment as to the significance of a particular period, but rather in the actual racial constitution of a people and in the dynamic processes which, for better or worse, are influencing that racial constitution.

Although the basic racial constitution of a people is always intimately related to that people’s achievements in commerce, science, industry, art, politics, and warfare, still the two sets of criteria can lead to fundamentally different evaluations of a given historical period. This is a consequence of the fact that race building and decay are usually strongly out of phase with civilization building and decay.

Rise and Fall of Races

Thus, the long ages between the periods of maximum civil activity — ages which the historian customarily ignores as being of only slight importance — may very well be periods of the greatest interest from a standpoint of racial dynamics.

It is, of course, true that the periods of maximum civil activity are precisely those which yield a maximum of written records, artifacts, and the other raw materials from which the historian builds his tale. But relative abundance of evidence should not be interpreted as equivalent to relative historical significance, regardless of the historian’s value criteria.

The record of the rise and fall of pure races constitutes the primary history of mankind, and the rise and fall of civilizations occupy a place of secondary importance. This statement may seem self-evident to those already accustomed to looking at history from a racial viewpoint, but it is by no means generally accepted by historians today. Until it is, much historical writing will continue to be flawed in a fundamental way.

Bringers of Iron

Rude though the Dorian newcomers from the north were, in one regard they stood on a higher cultural level than the bronze-using Achaeans they conquered: the Dorians brought iron tools and weapons and the secrets of ferrous metallurgy with them, ushering the Aegean world into the Iron Age.

At about the same time they occupied the Peloponnesus the Dorians also conquered and colonized Crete and a number of other Aegean islands, but the center of their power came to rest in the southern Peloponnesus, in the district of Laconia. The principal Laconian city was Sparta, and the Dorians made it their capital.

Spartans, Allies, and Serfs

The Dorians of Laconia organized the Peloponnesian population in a three-layered hierarchy. At the top were the citizens of Sparta, the Spartiates, all of pure Dorian blood, ruled by their kings.

Next came the Perioeci, or allies, who were free Hellenes, both Dorians and Achaeans. The Perioeci gave up all rights in the fields of foreign policy and military leadership to the Spartiates and fought under Spartan direction in time of war, but they retained the rights of self-government in other fields.

At the bottom of the social structure were the Helots, or serfs, consisting of the aboriginal Mediterranean elements as well as many of the conquered Achaeans of mixed blood. The Helots belonged exclusively to the Spartiates, worked the land on the Spartan hereditary estates, could not be bought or sold, and were obliged to render military service.

There were never more than 30,000 Spartiates altogether, about 8,000 of whom were adult males. They ruled over more than 600,000 Perioeci and Helots. This extreme numerical disadvantage, with the continual danger of revolt by the subject peoples it entailed, led the Dorians of Sparta to a unique mode of existence.

Warrior Caste

They focused nearly all their creative energies on the military sphere. Every Spartan man was a lifetime member of the warrior caste. Every Spartan boy received an upbringing designed solely to make him a worthy member of this caste.

For the sake of the single goal of military prowess the Spartiates not only exempted themselves from work and the other concerns of ordinary life, they positively forbade any occupation other than that of soldier. No Spartiate could engage in trade or practice a craft. The Perioeci handled all their commerce, and the Helots provided all their other needs.

City without Walls

Sparta thus had the only full-time, professional army in the Aegean world, and this fact gave her an influence vastly disproportionate to her numbers. So thoroughly did Sparta dominate all her neighbors, and so thoroughly feared and respected by all other Greeks for their military prowess were the Spartiates, that for more than 800 years the city had no need of walls or an acropolis, in marked contrast to every other Greek city of those times.

It is unfortunate that no written documents of any real significance survive from the centuries immediately following the Dorian invasion. It would be quite interesting to follow in detail the development of the unique Spartan lifestyle. Most historians take it for granted that it was solely the need to keep their Peloponnesian subjects in line, especially after their difficulty in putting down a major revolt in Messenia, a province to the west of Laconia, that forced the Spartiates into a military mold.

Beyond Imperialism

But the Dorians did more than create a professional military caste of unprecedented efficiency in the Spartiates, and it may be that their leaders had much more than empire in mind. Several aspects of Spartan life suggest even more a desire to avoid social and racial decadence than to intimidate neighbors or extort tribute.

For one thing, the Spartiates not only did not take advantage of the opportunity for opulence and luxury which their domination of the Peloponnesus gave them, but they instead went to an extreme in avoiding these things. Although each Spartan family was allotted a hereditary estate worked by Helots, the jewelry, perfumes, expensive dress, and other finery typical of ruling elites elsewhere were singularly absent from Spartan life.

Gold and silver were forbidden possessions, and traders in luxury items gave Sparta a wide berth. In food, in personal adornment, and in accommodations, austerity was the chosen Spartan way, rather than a necessity. And although other Dorians proved that their inherent talents in architecture, in music , and in the other fine arts were second to none, the Spartiates did not spend much of the time which their exemption from manual labor gave them lolling about writing poetry or plucking the lyre. Physical exercise and practice in the martial arts were unremitting occupations.

Eugenics

For another thing, the Spartiates gave an emphasis to racial fitness which went far beyond the needs of a strong and efficient army. Their eugenics program placed a premium on physical beauty — on aesthetic qualities, not just on raw strength or robustness.

Spartan women, for example, were a far cry from the muscle-bound behemoths one sees on Soviet women’s Olympic teams these days; instead, they were judged by other Greeks to be among the most beautiful and graceful, as well as the fairest, of Hellenic women, rivaled in beauty only by the women of Thebes.

Spartan eugenics not only eliminated the uncomely, the weak, and the deformed through a carefully supervised program of infanticide, but it went to considerable lengths to increase the number of offspring of the best men and women. Ted O’Keefe’s article in the June 1978 issue of National Vanguard, “Leonidas and the Spartan Ethos,” cites several examples of Spartan eugenic practices.

Admirable Institution

Another Spartan practice which suggests that racial rather than imperialistic motives may have been uppermost in the minds of their leaders was the regular thinning out of the Helot population, in what was known as the crypteia. This admirable institution sent teams of young Spartiates out into the countryside with daggers to dispatch Helots by the hundreds — an undertaking hardly consonant with a desire for as many subjects as possible, which is the norm for imperialists.

It easy to imagine the Spartiates, upon their arrival in Laconia, surveying the moral decadence and the racemixing which had made the Achaeans such an easy conquest for the Dorians, and then instituting a carefully designed program to safeguard themselves from a similar fate. For a time this program succeeded; the moral character and the racial quality of the Spartiates remained famously high. But ultimately it failed in both regards.

Despicable Vice

The Dorian conquest of Crete resulted in the infection of the Dorians with a despicable vice which was endemic there: homosexuality. From Crete this disease spread to the Greek mainland, and not even the Spartiates were immune to it (see box).

The other failing of the Spartan program was a simple matter of numbers: the Spartiates’ birthrate was insufficient to maintain their population at a viable level. As with other ruling classes at other times, the Spartiates did not produce enough children to make up for their losses in war. Even heavy penalties for celibacy and late marriage, and exemption from taxes for those Spartan families with four or more children, did not solve the problem.

Spartan Tragedy

At the beginning of the fifth century B.C. the Spartiates were able to field an army of 8,000 men against the Persians, but after the costly Spartan victory over Athens and her allies in the Peloponnesian War (431-404 B.C.) Spartan numbers declined rapidly. When the Spartiates marched against Thebes in 371 B.C., there were too few of them to prevail. After their decisive defeat by the Thebans at Leuctra, the Spartan army numbered only 2,000 warriors. A century and a half later there were only 700 of them, and they passed from the pages of history.

The Spartiates never succumbed to racemixing, but they did succumb to their own lifestyle. They would have been well advised to eliminate the Helots of the Peloponnesus and the Mediterranean population of Crete altogether and to establish a purely Dorian peasant class in those areas. Then they may well have been able to practice a successful eugenics program, maintain their moral health, and have a stable population too. But, of course, they did not have the advantage which hindsight gives us.

The other Hellenic tribes did succumb to racemixing. Their populations did not suffer the decline in numbers which the Spartiates’ did, but they suffered a decline in racial quality which resulted in their extermination, perhaps more slowly but just as surely — and less cleanly.

Athens

Athens was Sparta’s great political rival during much of the Classical Age. Athenian society came to be organized along quite different lines from Spartan society, but at the dawn of Greek history the similarities outweighed the differences.

The Ionian Greeks had already been in Attica, the east-central peninsula in which Athens is located, for several centuries before the Dorian invasion. That invasion set off a number of internal migrations in the Aegean world, and many Mycenaean refugees from the Peloponnesus arrived in Attica in the 12th century B.C. Thus, when Greek historical records begin in the seventh century, the Athenian population had been exposed to cosmopolitan influences for some time.

Predominantly Nordic

Still, the earliest Athenians were, like the other Hellenes, predominantly Nordic in blood and culture. Their social structure was aristocratic, and they were ruled originally by hereditary kings, just as in the case of the Spartiates.

Although Athenian tradition credits the legendary King Theseus with the political unification of the various semi-independent townships of Attica into a single “greater Athens” during the Heroic Age, it is certain that this unification actually did not take place until long after the Dorian invasion. In any event, the monarchy did not last long in unified Attica, and at the dawn of history the Athenians were ruled by a coalition of noble families, the Eupatrids (“those who are well sired”).

Free Citizen-Peasantry

In the seventh century there were two principal differences, from a racial viewpoint, between Sparta and Athens. The first difference, in favor of Sparta, was a culturally and racially more homogeneous class of citizens in Sparta than in Athens. The second was that Athens had a free citizen-peasantry — a decided plus for her.

Although Sparta’s professional army made her stronger militarily, there can be little doubt of the advantage Athens gained by not having to depend — at least, initially — upon such a large slave population for her agriculture and industry.

The Athenian army may not have been as efficient as Sparta’s, but it was thoroughly patriotic. In time of war every Athenian became a soldier, with no office or trade conferring exemption from duty. In a later century even Socrates donned armor and fought alongside his pupils.

Solonic Constitution

By the beginning of the sixth century, however, the Athenian peasants were in danger of losing their freedom, many of them having already been sold into slavery and others being effectively chained by indebtedness.

The social unrest resulting from this situation led the Athenians to give absolute power to Solon, a nobleman, in the hope that he could improve things. Solon gave Athens a constitution which wrought a number of changes with long-lasting effects, some good and some bad.

On the positive side, he outlawed the practice of enslavement for indebtedness. But he also took the decisive step of transferring the power of the Athenian state from the hands of the aristocracy into the hands of a plutocracy.

Although this latter change was only de jure at first, since the aristocrats were also the plutocrats, it shifted the ultimate criterion of fitness to rule from blood to gold. Henceforth, any sufficiently wealthy speculator who had acquired enough land to yield the specified amount of agricultural produce could theoretically qualify for the highest office in the state and for membership in the Council of the Areopagus (the highest judicial body in Athens, made up of nobles who had formerly held the office of archon, or ruler).

Race-Based Citizenry

Even after Solon, however, democracy did not devour the Athenians all at once. Solon and the tyrants who gained power shortly after his administration, the Peisistratids, governed an Athens in which citizenship was still a racial matter, being based on membership in one of the kinship groups, or clans, which made up the Hellenic tribes of Attica.

In 509 B.C., 85 years after the beginning of. Solon’s administration, another “reformer,” Cleisthenes, took office, and he undertook a program of gerrymandering which laid the basis for changing citizenship from a racial to a geographic affair. From this point it was downhill all the way for Athens, racially speaking.

Half a century later the last remnants of power were transferred from the Areopagus to a popular council. All the abuses of mass party politics with which Americans are all too familiar were thenceforth the lot of the Athenians.

Law of Pericles

As the prosperity of Athens grew, more and more foreigners crowded into Attica, with intermarriage inevitably occurring. A temporary halt to the pollution of the Athenian citizenry by the offspring of aliens came in 451 B.C., when the great Pericles pushed through a law restricting citizenship to those born of an Athenian father and an Athenian mother. Only four decades later, however, in order to make up the enormous losses suffered in the Peloponnesian War, Athens bestowed citizenship on tens of thousands of foreigners.

And in the fourth century, although the citizenship law of Pericles remained on the books, every variety of Levantine mongrel was claiming Athenian citizenship. The banking industry of Athens, for example, was entirely in the hands of Semites, who had taken Greek names and were awarded citizenship for “service to the state,” much in the way Jews and Negroes have been elevated to the British “nobility” by the score in recent decades.

Darkening of Hellas

Intermarriage was rife, and the darkening of the Hellenes of Athens was well under way. Racial, moral, and cultural decline went hand in hand. The second-century historian Polybius described his countrymen as “degenerate, pleasure-seeking beggars, without loyalty or belief, and without hope for a better future.”

A century later, in the reign of Augustus, the Roman writer Manilius reckoned the Hellenes among the dark nations (coloratae genies). And so the Athenians, like the Spartiates, passed from the pages of history.

If it is difficult to believe that as great a state as Athens could pass from Nordic genius and glory to mongrelized squalor in a few centuries, just think for a moment of the racial transformation of America which has taken place in a single century. And imagine what America will be like two or three centuries hence (barring a White revolution), when Whites are a minority, outnumbered by both Blacks and Chicanos. America’s technology and industry may coast along for a century or two on the momentum acquired from earlier generations, as Athens’ culture did, but the American people — the real Americans — will have passed from the pages of history.

The passing of the Hellenes must be regarded as one of the greatest tragedies of our race. A great-hearted and noble people, filled with genius and energy, they seized upon the resources in labor, material, and land which their conquest of the conservative Mediterranean world offered, and they wrought one of the most progressive civilizations this earth has yet seen. Indeed, many of their creations remain unsurpassed to this day.

Faustian Spirit

In the Hellenes subtlety of intellect was combined with the adventurous, ever-questing Faustian spirit which has always been the preeminent trait of the Nordic peoples. In the same tribes were Homer’s warrior-princes, Achilles and Odysseus, courageous, boldly aggressive, proud and skilled in arms, for whom manly honor was the supreme virtue; and Archimedes and Euclid, whose insight into the nature of the universe around them and whose powers of reason elevated man to a new level of cosmic consciousness and gave him potent new means for further elevating himself.

Into the art of the Hellenes were distilled both these essences, a deeply sensitive expression of man’s awareness of his universe combined with an upward-yearning Faustian boldness, yielding a beauty of such intensity that the heart of the beholder aches with longing.

Aristotle Onassis

And what a contrast between the Hellenes and their achievements, on the one hand, and what existed before — and has existed since — in Greece! That is not to say that every Greek of today is unimaginative or insensitive or ugly, but it is clear that something essential has been lost between the time of Aristotle and the time of his late namesake, Mr. Onassis. And the loss was at least as great between the time of Achilles and Aristotle, although the culture-lag phenomenon tends to mask this earlier decline in racial quality.

The Hellenic genes are still there, the genes of the race which gloried in single combat between equals facing one another on the field of battle and pitting skill, courage, and strength in a contest to the death, but they are now submerged in the genes of a race which always preferred to sling its stones from afar, to lie in stealthy ambush, to give a surprise knife-thrust from the rear. The race-soul which first envisioned the symmetry of the Doric temple and pondered the mysteries of existence as none before it has become inextricably mingled with one concerned, first and last, with personal advantage and disadvantage, profit and loss.

Extermination or Expulsion

This catastrophic mixing of bloods has occurred over and over again in the history and prehistory of our race, and each time it has been lethal. The knowledge of this has been with us a long time, but it has always failed us in the end. The Hellenes of Sparta and Athens both strove to keep their blood pure, but both ultimately perished. The only way they could have survived would have been to eliminate the entire indigenous population, either through expulsion or extermination, from the areas of the Mediterranean world in which they settled.

The Hellenes always possessed a certain feeling of racial unity, distinguishing themselves sharply from all those not of their blood, but this racial feeling was, unfortunately, usually overshadowed by intraracial conflicts. The rivalries between Hellenic city-states were so fierce and so pervasive, that the Mediterranean natives were more often looked upon as a resource to be used against other Hellenes than as a biological menace to be eliminated.

BOXED TEXT

The Ancient Greeks and Homosexuality

One can only speculate on the reasons why homosexuality was so common among the Greeks of the Classical Age, whether Athenian or Spartiate. As best we can judge from Homer’s epics, this vice was not a problem in the Heroic Age. All the heroes of the Iliad seem motivated by normal sexual drives; healthy heterosexual themes, in fact, underlie the entire epic, from the abduction of Helen by the Trojans and the Greek expedition to retrieve her to the squabble over slave girls which gave rise to the animosity between Achilles and Agamemnon. And one can also reasonably infer that it had not become a problem in Homer’s own time, presumably in the ninth century B.C.; otherwise it seems likely some homosexual flavor would have crept into his compositions.

On the other hand, we know that homosexuality was deeply ingrained in many of the native populations of the Mediterranean region, and not just among the Cretans. The ancient Hebrews, for example, practiced mass ritual masturbation and priestly buggery, and Moses was hard put to convince them to give up these habits. Even after Moses’ time, the traditional Jewish manner of sealing a bargain and of greeting was to seize one another’s genitals, a practice euphemistically described in the King James version of the Old Testament as “placing the hand under the other’s thigh.”

But we cannot say why this vileness, initially absent among the Greeks, later spread so virulently among them. Certainly it would be rash to attribute a special weakness for homosexuality to the Greeks. Our experience in America shows that, once certain weaknesses in the social structure have come about and public tolerance of depravity has set in, homosexuality can spread like wildfire.

One would form an entirely different estimate of Americans’ inherent susceptibility to it from a survey made today then from a survey made even 20 years ago. Unfortunately, the problem seems certain to be even worse in America 20 years hence, as our society continues to degenerate unless a revolution has swept the practitioners of this perversion from our shores by then.

And the American experience is probably our best guide in judging the Greeks’ homosexual problem. Even when homosexuality was most widespread, there were a great many Hellenes who remained untouched by it, still as healthy in their sexual attitudes as their Nordic forebears had been when they first arrived in the Mediterranean world. At its worst, it was only one of many symptoms of decay which cast a pall over the essentially healthy and beautiful culture which the Greeks created.

ILLUSTRATIONS

a) ATHENS’ THESEION, dedicated to the legendary King Theseus, is one of the best-preserved Doric temples. Harmony, strength, and simplicity characterize the architectural style created by the last major wave of Nordics into Greece.

b) PERICLES, 5th-century B.C. Athenian statesman, was of the best Hellenic stock, and his legislation restricting citizenship was a step toward preserving the racial health of that stock. Unfortunately, the step was too little and too late. And it is ironic that Pericles also, in his quest for political power, appealed to the lowest elements of Athenian society and nourished the social disease called democracy, thereby hastening the decadence and decline of his people.

c) DEMOSTHENES (left), 4th-century B.C. Athenian patriot and outstanding orator; and Menander, 4th-century B.C. Athenian poet. Both heads show the Nordic character of Athens’ earliest Hellenic population.

d) THE BEAUTY of the human body was an ever-present and ever-powerful source of artistic, philosophical, and spiritual inspiration to the Hellenes. They were the first human beings to successfully embody an ideal vision of beauty In sculpture which was at the same time thoroughly naturalistic, and they have never been surpassed in this art.

Before we deal with the next Indo-European peoples of the Classical Age — the Macedonians and the Romans — let us review briefly the history of our race to this point, and let us also look at the fate of some Indo-Europeans who, unlike those we have already studied, invaded Asia instead of Europe.

The White race of today consists of three principal White elements — plus, unfortunately, a certain admixture of non-White elements. The former are the Cro-Magnon element, a White Mediterranean element, and the Nordic element.

Original Europeans

The Cro-Magnons were the original White people of Europe. Their traces go back 35,000 years, into the last of the great Ice Ages. They were a tall, rugged race, a race of hunters, who thrived on the frozen tundra which covered most of Europe during Upper Paleolithic times. They were the most culturally advanced race on the planet during those times: their art and their skill in making weapons, clothing, and tools surpassed those of all other races.

When the glaciers retreated about 10,000 years ago, some Cro-Magnon tribes followed them northward, continuing their ages-old lifestyle as big-game hunters. Their descendants today are to be found primarily in Scandinavia and the British Isles.

Other Cro-Magnon tribes learned new lifestyles along the seacoasts of northern Europe or in the forests which sprang up across Europe in the wake of the glaciers. But these Cro-Magnon tribes of the Mesolithic Age, whose members lived by hunting, fishing, and gathering, were spread quite thinly across Europe, Their lifestyles were not suited for a high population density.

Neolithic Revolution

Along the southern coastal fringes of Europe and in adjacent areas of northern Africa and the Middle East — areas which had been less affected by the great ice sheets of the previous age — lived men who were smaller and more gracile than the Cro-Magnons of the northern forests and coasts. Collectively they were the Mediterraneans, although they were by no means as nearly racially homogenous a group as the Cro-Magnons. Some we would have regarded as White and some as non-White, although it might have been difficult to decide just where to draw the line.

When the glaciers began retreating in Europe, the climate of the Mediterranean area changed as well. Varieties of wild, grain-bearing grasses flourished, and men began deliberately cultivating these grasses as a food supply. They also began keeping animals as a food source, instead of relying solely upon hunting. Thus began the Neolithic Revolution.

The Neolithic Revolution caused a population explosion, with an enormous increase in population density in those areas which had shifted from hunting and gathering foodstuffs to stock raising and farming. As the climatic zone suitable for farming advanced northward, the farming peoples flooded into a Europe with a relatively low population density, racially swamping the Cro-Magnon inhabitants in many areas.

Two civilizations arose in the wake of the Neolithic Revolution, one in the Middle East and one in Europe. The latter civilization, centered in the Balkan area, we have called Old Europe.

Nordics

Then, around the middle of the fifth millennium B.C., a new racial type made its first impact on Old Europe. The people of this type were taller and more rugged than the White Mediterraneans, but not so tall or rugged as the Cro-Magnons. They were the Nordics, and 7,000 years ago they occupied a large area in Russia, mostly steppeland, north of the Black Sea and between the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea.

Their language was Proto-Indo-European, from which Greek and Latin and the great Germanic, Celtic, and Slavic language families of Europe evolved. They were an extraordinarily energetic people, who hunted, farmed, and raised livestock. In particular, they domesticated horses, riding them and using them to pull their swift, light, two-wheeled chariots over the grassy plains.

Their social structure was aristocratic, and their religion was solar. They were, in contrast to the Mediterraneans, quite homogeneous racially and culturally. Homogeneity was a consequence of the mobility which their use of horses gave them; men from the extreme limits of the ancient Nordic homeland were able to remain in genetic and cultural contact.

When these Nordic horsemen of the northern steppes (or battle-axe people, as they have been called) outgrew their grassy homeland, some of them migrated westward into Europe. We have followed the fortunes of these migrants in earlier installments in this series.

But some moved east and south, into Asia instead of Europe. We do not know when the first of these movements occurred or when the Nordics first made contact with the Mediterranean peoples of the Middle East.

Black-Haired Sumerians

The Sumerians, who built the first literate civilization in the Middle East, around 3,500 B.C., were Mediterraneans, not Nordics. Their language was unique, related neither to any Indo-European tongue nor to the Semitic languages of the indigenous population of the Middle East.

The Sumerians invaded Mesopotamia during the fifth millennium B.C., probably coming from the mountains of northern or western Iran; their traditions referred to a mountainous homeland. They brought to Mesopotamia with them the techniques of bronze metallurgy, which had its origin in the Caucasus Mountains, not far from northwestern Iran. And they brought chariots.

Significantly, the Sumerians referred to themselves as “the black-haired people,” strongly suggesting that at one time they had been in contact with a fair-haired race.

Did Nordics Rule Sumeria?

Did, in fact, the Sumerians learn the use of chariots — and, perhaps, some of the other skills of civilization as well — from contacts with the Nordics north of the Caucasus? Or did a Nordic invasion into the mountains of northwestern Iran impel the Sumerians, perhaps led by a tiny minority of Nordic chieftains, to migrate into southern Mesopotamia? We do not yet know.

Likewise, we do not know whether the Elamites, a non-Semitic Mediterranean people of southeastern Mesopotamia and western Iran, were ruled by Indo-Europeans. But we do know that several Mediterranean peoples of the Middle East were indeed conquered and ruled by a Nordic elite. Among these were the Hittites, the Kassites, and the Hurrians.

During the third and second millennia B.C., wave after wave of Indo-Europeans left their ancient homeland, as they already had been doing for at least two millennia. Some went around the western end of the Black Sea and doubled back into Asia Minor from the west, passing their cousins from an earlier wave along the way, while some went south across the Caucasus and then into Asia Minor from the east. Some went down through Turkistan, along the eastern side of the Caspian Sea, and into Iran from the northeast. And some took a southeasterly route across Turkistan as far as the Karakoram and the Hindu Kush.

Conquest of Babylon

All the waves played havoc with the Mediterranean peoples of the mountains and the plains through whose territories they moved. In the Zagros Mountains of western Iran the Indo-European warriors met and conquered the Kassites, a non-Semitic and non-Indo-European people probably related to the Elamites. This conquest probably took place in the 20th or 19th century B.C.

In the l8th century the Nordic-ruled Kassites came boiling down from the mountains into the Mesopotamian plain, pillaging and laying waste to the Semitic kingdoms there. They were initially checked by the Semitic Babylonians, but they retained their hold on a large area of east-central Mesopotamia, establishing a new Kassite kingdom there under their Indo-European chieftain, Gandash. Later, in the l6th century, the Kassites moved against a decadent Babylon and conquered it. An Indo-European king then sat on the Babylonian throne.

Mitanni: Nordic Lords

Before that, however, other Indo-European-led peoples began writing their chapters in the history of the Middle East. Sometime before the l8th century the Hurrians came down from the mountains of eastern Asia Minor into northern Mesopotamia and northeastern Syria. Like the Kassites, they devastated the Semitic peoples of the plain and desert. And, also like the Kassites, they were led by a Nordic warrior clan, the Mitanni.

During the l8th century the Mitanni-led Hurrians conquered more and more of Semitic Syria, raiding far down into Canaan. This brought them into contact with the Egyptians, who had outposts as far north as Ugarit, on the Syrian coast.

Hyksos: Mixed Multitude

Some Hurrians took service with the Egyptians as mercenary warriors, and the Egyptian descriptions of the blond, grey-eyed charioteers who led the Hurrian mercenaries leave no doubt that the Mitanni still preserved their racial purity at that time. It was the Mitanni, incidentally, who introduced the first horses into Egypt.

A few years later, in the l7th century, a mixed Hurrian-Canaanite army, the Hyksos, invaded Egypt in force, overthrowing the last pharaoh of Egypt’s 13th dynasty and ruling the country for a century. Some of the Hyksos were still recognizably White, but mixing with the Semitic Canaanites quickly sapped their racial strength, and the Egyptians were able to expel them early in the l6th century.

Hittites

Within the 120-mile-wide loop of the Halys River (modern Turkish name: Kizil Irmak) in central Asia Minor lay, in ancient times, the altogether unremarkable kingdom of the Hatti and their capital Hattusas. The Hatti were a Mediterranean people; quite “beaky” in appearance, they could easily be taken for Jews. Their original language, neither Semitic nor Indo-European, was probably related to the languages of the other mountain-dwelling peoples of the area, but so few traces remain that it is impossible to say with certainty.

The Hatti were rescued from obscurity sometime around 2,000 B.C., when they had the good fortune to be conquered by a group of Indo-European warriors from north of the Black Sea. These Nordic conquerors brought not only their bronze battle-axes, their horses, and their chariots to the land of the Hatti; they also brought their Indo-European language and religion.

Henceforth, the Mediterranean Hatti, with their Nordic aristocracy, were known to the world as “Hittites.” They spoke the tongue of their conquerors and worshipped the northern god of the sky.

Nordic Bringers of Iron

There are no written records of the first few centuries after the Nordic conquest of the Hatti; the Hittites entered history in the l7th century B.C., when King Labarnas ruled. They began being mentioned in the records of their Semitic neighbors, who were becoming increasingly alarmed as Hittite squadrons raided further and further afield.

Not only had the Hittites become skilled in blitzkrieg tactics with their war chariots, making lightning raids across the mountains and down into the plains of northern Mesopotamia and Syria, but they fought with weapons of a new kind, previously unknown to their Semitic foes: iron weapons. The Hittites ushered in the Iron Age.

Conquest of Yamkhad

Although the Semitic armies of the plains could not stand up against the Hittite warriors and their chariots on the battlefield, the plains cities were heavily fortified; if the Semites could reach the safety of their walls, the fast-moving Hittite squadrons could not harm them. So the Hittites taught themselves the tactics of siege warfare. The first major city to fall to them was Aleppo, capital of the Semitic kingdom of Yamkhad, in northern Syria.

A few years later, in 1595 B.C., the Hittites, under King Mursilis, captured mighty Babylon, which lay a full 500 miles southeast of Aleppo. The Semites were taken completely by surprise, and the fast-moving Hittite army burned and plundered the most powerful Semitic capital. The Hittites, unfortunately, were not numerous enough to adequately garrison their conquest, and so they had to withdraw to the north again with their booty, leaving Babylon to be occupied and ruled by the Kassites.

New Blood: Phrygians

In succeeding centuries the Hittites built a mighty empire in the Middle East which lasted until about 1,200 B.C. As was so often the case with other empires founded by Indo-Europeans, the proximate cause of the demise of the Hittite empire was the appearance on the scene of a new group of Indo-Europeans who had not yet polluted their blood through racemixing — in this case, the Phrygians.

Toward the end of the 13th century the Phrygians came around the western end of the Black Sea and crossed over into Asia Minor from Macedonia. Their Indo-European cousins, the Dorians, may well have been their traveling companions, until the paths of the two groups separated in Macedonia, with the Dorians continuing southward to conquer the Achaeans of the Peloponnesus, while the Phrygians turned eastward to conquer the Hittites.

At about the same time, a group of Indo-European invaders — part of a larger group given the name “Peoples of the Sea” by the Egyptians — landed on the coast of southern Canaan, conquered the local Semites, and established a kingdom. They were the Philistines, from whom came the modern name of the territory they occupied: Palestine.

The exact origin of the Peoples of the Sea is not known with certainty. About all that can be said is that they had previously lived in the Aegean area: on the Greek mainland, the coast of Asia Minor, or the Aegean islands.

They may have been Achaeans uprooted by one of the other invasions sweeping through the Aegean world at that time. Or they may have been an especially large contingent of those “divine-born heroes” who came across the Aegean and made such an impact on Mycenaean Greece just a few generations before the Trojan war. In any event, they were Indo-Europeans — Nordic White men who had come into the Aegean area from north of the Black Sea at some earlier time.

Unhealthy Diet

The Philistines eventually extended their hegemony over the Semitic Israelites, who were their neighbors, and exacted tribute from the Israelite cities. The Israelites in turn regarded the Philistines as arch-enemies and hated them as only Jews can. Thus arose the Old Testament slurs against the Philistines, leading to the use of the word “Philistine” in a derogatory sense even today by Indo-Europeans raised on an unhealthy diet of Jewish mythology.

Every White man, woman, and child should understand that, on the contrary, the Philistines were the “good guys” in that ancient conflict between Aryan and Semite — a conflict which has continued unabated to this day.

The modern Palestinians, of course, bear as little resemblance to the ancient Philistines as the modern inhabitants of north-eastern Syria do to the ancient Mitanni. In the intervening centuries there have been new invasions of the Middle East, in many cases by non-Indo-Europeans, but the main reason this entire section of the world, once ruled by blond horsemen from the northern steppes, is so utterly non-White today is that the Indo-Europeans were, in nearly all cases, only a tiny racial elite in the midst of a sea of Semites and other non-Indo-Europeans.

Wrong Choice

Because this elite generally chose to conquer and rule, rather than to exterminate, they invariably fell victim to racemixing and eventual absorption into the non-Indo-European masses. Today their only traces are to be found in an occasional gray-eyed or blue-eyed or green-eyed Turk or Syrian, a fair-haired Iraqi or Palestinian.

In the cases of those peoples who left extensive records, oral or written, which have come down to us, it is plain that the failure of the Indo-Europeans who invaded the Middle East and other parts of Asia to maintain their stock unmixed was not due to a lack of racial consciousness: there was always a strong awareness of the fundamental differences between themselves and the non-Indo-European peoples around them. Nor was it due to any milksop morality, any turn-the-other-cheek doctrine of pacifism or false humanitarianism which kept them from extirpating the alien gene pool in order to preserve the integrity of their own.

Economics over Race

The ultimate downfall of the Nordic conquerors in Asia, just as in the Mediterranean world, can be traced to an economic consideration and to an error in human judgment. The economic consideration was that a conquered population, just like the land itself or the gold and other booty seized by the conquerors, had real value. Whether the people were enslaved or merely taxed as subjects, they were an economic resource which could be exploited by the conquerors. To drive them off the land or wipe them out completely would, from a strictly economic viewpoint, be akin to dumping captured gold into the ocean.

Such an action could be justified to a conquering tribe of Indo-Europeans only if they were willing to subordinate all economic considerations to the goal of maintaining their racial integrity into the indefinite future — and if they also had a sufficiently deep understanding of history to foresee the inevitability of racial mixing wherever two races are in close proximity. Unfortunately, even where the will for racial survival was very strong, the foresight was insufficient. Measures which were quite adequate to prevent racemixing for a few generations, or even for a few centuries, broke down over the course of a thousand years or more.

Aryans

The foregoing remarks are especially well illustrated by the fate of a related group of Indo-European tribes whose members called themselves Aryans. Although the name “Aryan” is sometimes used to designate any person of Indo-European ancestry, it applies especially to the tribes which, beginning probably in the third millennium B.C., migrated eastward and southeastward from the ancient Nordic homeland, some going down through Turkistan and into Iran from the northeast — and some into the more easterly foothills of the Hindu Kush, in what is now Afghanistan.

The high Iranian plateau, much of it covered with grass, provided an ideal territory for the horsemen from the northern steppes. They multiplied and prospered, raiding their non-Indo-European neighbors in the Zagros Mountains or on the edge of the Sumerian plain from time to time, collecting slaves and booty. They maintained their racial purity scrupulously enough, however, so that, as late as the middle of the first millennium B.C., King Darius the Great could still proudly and truthfully boast: “I am an Aryan, the son of an Aryan.”

But Semites and other aliens became more numerous in Iran as the might and wealth of the Aryan Persians grew. In the reign of Darius’ son Xerxes, as we know from the Old Testament’s Book of Esther, Jews were already quite influential there. Today, 2,500 yeas later, the Iranians are no more Aryan than their Semitic neighbors, so thoroughly have the genes of the various races in that part of the world been mixed.

Conquest of India

To the east, in India, the details were different, but the outcome was the same. In the l6th century B.C. there was a thriving, non-White civilization in the Indus valley, with centers at Mohenjo-daro and Harappa. Trade was carried on with countries as far away as Egypt.

Then the Aryans came across the towering, ice-covered Hindu Kush in the north and fell upon the dwellers in the southern valleys with irresistible ferocity. First Harappa, and then Mohenjo-daro, was razed, and the Indo-Europeans were in possession of the rich Land of the Seven Rivers.

It was yet another land whose aboriginal inhabitants differed profoundly from the Indo-European conquerors, both physically and spiritually. And in this new land the Aryans made as determined an effort as anywhere to avoid racemixing.

The tribal society of the Nordic invaders was already organized hierarchically into three estates, or castes: the priests, the warriors (from whom came the rulers), and the workers (farmers, craftsmen, and merchants). After the conquest of the Indian aborigines (or dasyus, as the Aryans called them), a fourth estate was added: that of the servants, the hewers of wood and the fetchers of water.

The estates, which among the Aryans had been somewhat flexible, offering the possibility of social movement from one estate to another, became fixed in an absolutely rigid caste system. The members of the first three castes, now called Brahmans (priests), Kshatriyas (warriors and rulers), and Vaishyas (workers), were Aryans. The members of the fourth caste, the Shudras (servants), were dasyus. Not only intermarriage, but every form of social intercourse between the castes except that absolutely necessary for the functioning of society, was banned, and the ban had the authority of religion as well as of law.

‘The Laws of Manu, the most ancient legal code to have come down to us from Aryan India, spell out explicitly the duties of the castes:

“To Brahmans he (Brahma, the Creator, the soul of the universe) assigned teaching and studying the Veda, sacrificing for their own benefit and for others, giving and accepting of alms. [The Vedas (the name comes from the Aryan word meaning “knowledge”) are the collections of sacred writings of the ancient Aryans from the period shortly after the conquest. The particular Veda referred to here is the Rig-Veda.]

‘The Kshatriya he commanded protect the people, to bestow gifts, to offer sacrifices, to study the Veda, and to abstain from attaching himself to sensual measures.

“The Vaishya to tend cattle, to bestow gifts, to offer sacrifices, to study the Veda, to trade, to lend money, and to cultivate land.

“One occupation only Brahma prescribed to the Shudra: to serve meekly the other three castes.”

Twice-Born Ones

The dasyus were excluded not only from social intercourse with Aryans and from occupations reserved for Aryans, but also from any participation in the Aryan religion; the Shudra caste the only one not enjoined to study the Veda. Young Aryans were initiated into the adult religious community in special rites, the initiation being considered a “second birth.” The Laws of Manu say: “The Brahman, the Kshatriya, and the Vaishya castes are the twice-born ones, but the fourth, the Shudra, has no second birth. There is no fifth caste.”

The Sanskrit literature of the ancient Aryans is filled with references to the distaste the Nordic conquerors felt for the dark, flat-nosed natives. Poets referred to the dasyus as “the noseless ones” and “the blackskins.” One poet wrote, “Destroying the dasyus, Indra (the ancient Aryan god of the sky, cognate with the Hellenic Zeus and Roman Jupiter, head of the Aryan pantheon prior to the rise of Brahmanism) protected the Aryan color.” According to another poet, “Indra protected in battle the Aryan worshipper … he conquered the blackskin.” And still another: “He (Indra) beat the dasyus as is his wont…. He conquered the land with his white friends.”

Indo-European Unity

The Sanskrit literature, incidentally, has preserved for us the most extensive sample of an Indo-European language from the second millennium B.C. (assuming that the earliest Vedas, which were originally transmitted orally, were fixed in their present form sometime prior to 1,000 B.C.). Many common Sanskrit words are quite similar to common words of the same or similar meaning in the classical or modern European languages, thus illustrating the unity of the Indo-European peoples and their languages over the enormous area of the earth’s surface which they eventually covered.

For example: pitar (Sanskrit), pater (Greek and Latin), vater (German), father (English); matar (Sanskrit), meter (Greek), mater (Latin), mat (Russian), mutter (German), mother (English); bhratar (Sanskrit), frater (Latin), brat (Russian), bruder (German), brother (English); svasar (Sanskrit), soror (Latin), sestra (Russian), schwester (German), sister (English); duhitar (Sanskrit), thugater (Greek), tochter (German), daughter (English); vidhava (Sanskrit), vidua (Latin), vdova (Russian), witwe (German.), widow (English).

Unfortunately, the Aryans of ancient India were far more successful in preserving their language than their racial integrity. The Brahmans and Kshatriyas of the India of today are lighter, on the average, than the Untouchables, and there are a number of individuals in northern India who are practically White in their coloring and features — but, nevertheless, the Aryans are gone forever. All their initial determination and all the rigidity of the caste system were insufficient to prevent a mixing of genes over the span of 35 centuries.

The insidiousness of the destruction of a race through racemixing lies in the gradualness with which it can proceed. In the beginning one has two quite distinct races — one tall and fair, the other short and dark. Keeping the two from mixing genetically seems a simple matter.

Crop of Half-Breeds

The first step may be a simple matter of military indiscipline: the rape of a few hundred dasyu women in a rebellious district after a revolt is put down by Aryan warriors. Twenty years later there will be a crop of half-breeds in that district, and some of the half-breed females will be much lighter and comelier than the average dasyu.

These light ones will be especially likely to be targeted for rape the next time there is a rebellion — or the next time a gang of drunken Aryans goes out on the town. And so, 20 years later, there will be some quarter-breeds around — and some of these may be light enough to be chosen as concubines by the local Aryan landlord.

Beware the Almost-Whites!

And so it goes, century after century, with the simple Black-White picture gradually giving way to one in which there is a continuous range of mongrels between the two racial extremes. Near the White end of the spectrum there will be some who, although carrying some dasyu genes, will be almost indistinguishable from the true Aryans. Drawing the line between what is Aryan and what is not becomes more and more difficult. And as the racial picture becomes more blurred, the will to preserve the race is sapped. Many of the almost-Aryans will be bright and energetic citizens; style will be mistaken for substance; the keen edge of the Aryan race-soul will be blunted by imperceptible degrees.

Diluted Essence

By the time the damage has become quite noticeable, racial decadence has become irreversible. The subtle but essential qualities of psyche and intellect in the Aryans which led to conquest and to the building of Aryan civilization are diluted to ineffectiveness in their almost-Aryan descendants 15 or 20 centuries later, even though fair hair and blue eyes may still be abundant.

That is what happened to Aryan Persia and Aryan India. And it is also what is happening to Aryan America and Aryan Europe today.

ILLUSTRATIONS

a) NORDIC INVASIONS of the Middle East in the third and second millennia B.C.

b) MEDITERRANEAN and Negro prisoners are depicted on ivory handle of walking cane from the tomb of Egyptian Pharaoh Tutankhamen (14th century B.C.). The Mediterranean was probably typical of those ruled by a Nordic elite throughout most of the Middle East during the second millennium B.C.

c) ARMENOID head is that of a modern inhabitant of a portion of Turkey which was formerly in the ancient Hittite Empire. The “beaky” appearance was a characteristic of the Matti, a Mediterranean people ruled by a Nordic aristocracy.

d) TEHRAN MOB shows utterly un-Aryan features of present-day Iranians. This generalized Middle Eastern type of Mediterranean has been outbreeding the Aryan Persians for the last 2,500 years, leaving today’s Iran a substantially non-White country.

e) FRIEZE OF THE ARCHERS in the ruins of the palace of Darius the Great at Susa shows that Persians were still predominantly Nordic in the fifth century B.C. This frieze, in colored enameled tiles, depicts members of the king’s bodyguard, the “Immortals.” Their hair is golden, and their eyes are blue.

The last five installments in this series have dealt with the migrations of Nordic, Indo-European-speaking tribes from their homeland in southern Russia, beginning more than 6,000 years ago and continuing into early historic times. In installment 11 we traced the fate of those Nordics who invaded Asia, conquering races which differed substantially from them and eventually being absorbed by those races, despite strong measures for self-preservation.

Only those Nordics who migrated westward, into Europe rather than into Asia, have left a significant genetic heritage. And only those who went northwestward predominated genetically in the long run. Along the shores of the Mediterranean the population density of non-Nordic natives was too high, and racial mixing eventually overwhelmed the invaders. We have already seen what happened to the Greeks.

Balkan Nordics

To the north and northeast of Greece, from the head of the Aegean Sea to the eastern shore of the Adriatic Sea, other Nordic peoples from beyond the Black Sea settled. Among these peoples were the Illyrians, the Dacians, the Thracians, and the Macedonians. Very roughly, the Illyrians occupied the territory comprising much of present-day Yugoslavia and Albania; the Dacians occupied the loop of the lower Danube, in what is now Romania; the Thracians occupied Bulgaria and European Turkey; and the Macedonians occupied the territory between Albania and Bulgaria, comprising the Macedonian provinces of Yugoslavia and Greece. This was a greatly varied territory, and consequently the Nordic inhabitants, though closely related in blood and culture, experienced varied fates.

As we noted in earlier installments, this territory was the site of the Mediterranean Neolithic culture known as Old Europe, which arose about 8,000 years ago and lasted until the first Nordic invasions, which came during the late fifth and early fourth millennia B.C. The early invasions were numerically thin, however, and resulted, in many parts of this Balkan area, in a situation with which we are already familiar: a Nordic warrior elite ruling masses of indigenous Mediterranean farmers and craftsmen.

Blending, Disunity

This situation led to a great deal of racial and cultural blending. The languages of the Nordics prevailed everywhere, but their blood and their religion became mixed with those of the Mediterraneans. For example, even as late as historic times, when further invasions had greatly reinforced the Nordic racial element in the area, the Thracian religion remained a strongly interwoven blend of Mediterranean Earth Mother elements and Nordic Sky Father elements. In the case of the Greeks the Nordic elements had prevailed, but in the case of the Thracians the Mediterranean elements, with their serpent-phallic symbolism and orgiastic rites, played a much larger role.

Both geography and the inhomogeneous racial pattern of the area worked against political unity, and the Balkan region, in ancient times just as in recent times, remained balkanized. Only in Macedonia did a strong enough central authority arise and maintain itself long enough to have a major impact on the world beyond this corner of Europe.

Rise of Macedonia

Ancient Macedonia consisted principally of an inland, mountain-and-plateau region (Upper Macedonia); and a grassy plain at the head of the Thermaic Gulf (Gulf of Salonika), spanning the valleys of the lower Haliacmon (Vistritsa) and Axius (Vardar) Rivers. The Macedonian plain provided ideal conditions for the Nordic horsemen from the steppe of southern Russia.

In the middle of the 12th century B.C. the Dorian invasion swept through Macedonia on its southward course, and a large contingent of Dorians remained in the Macedonian plain, pushing much of the earlier population of Greeks, Thracians, and Illyrians into Upper Macedonia.

After a half-millennium of consolidation, the Macedonian kingdom was born. The first Macedonian king, Perdiccas I, unified the Dorians and the other tribes of the plain and brought them under his control around 640 B.C. Three centuries later King Philip II brought Upper Macedonia into the kingdom as well.

The Macedonians in the fourth century B.C. still had the vigor which decadence had drained from the Greeks of the south, and Philip was able to establish Macedonian hegemony over the greater portion of the Balkan peninsula. In 338 B.C., in the battle of Chaeronea, he crushed the Greek armies, and Macedonia became a world power.

Alexander the Great

But it was Philip’s son. Alexander, who used this power base to launch a new and vastly greater wave of Nordic conquest. In 336, at the age of 20, he succeeded his father as king of Macedonia. Within a decade he had conquered most of the ancient world.

Alexander’s principal conquests lay in the Middle East, however, in the area treated in the previous installment: Egypt, Palestine, Syria, Asia Minor, Mesopotamia, Iran, Afghanistan, and the Aryan realm of northwest India. The greater portion of this territory had already been conquered by the Persians, under Cyrus the Great, two centuries earlier. By bringing it under common rule with Greece and Macedonia, Alexander created the greatest empire the world had yet seen.

Unfortunately, despite his military and organizational genius, Alexander did not understand the racial basis of civilization. He dreamed of a unified world-empire, with all its diverse races expressing a single culture and ordered by a single rule. At a great feast of reconciliation between Greeks and Persians at Opis, on the Tigris River some 40 miles above Baghdad, in 324, when his conquests were complete, he stated his dream explicitly.

Forced Racemixing

And throughout his brief but uniquely dynamic career of empire-building, Alexander acted consistently with this dream. He adopted Asiatic customs and dress, blending them with the Macedonian lifestyle and requiring many of his officers to do the same. He left in power many of the native satraps of the conquered regions, after receiving their oaths of loyalty. And it was not Macedonian Pella, but Semitic Babylon which he chose as the capital of his empire.

Alexander preached racemixing, and he practiced it. During the conquest of Sogdiana (comprising the modern Uzbek and Tadzhik Republics of the U.S.S.R.) he took to wife the daughter, Roxane, of a local baron. Four years later, at Susa, in 324, he also married the daughter of the defeated Persian king, Darius II. On that occasion he bade his officers and men to imitate him; nearly a hundred of the former and 10,000 of the latter took native brides in a mass marriage.

Alexander’s brides, and presumably those of his officers as well, were of noble Persian blood, which, even as late as the fourth century B.C., meant most of them were White — Nordic, in fact. But certainly most of the 10,000 brides of his soldiers were not; they were Asiatics: Semites and the bastard offspring of Semites and Aryans and a dozen other races.

Short-lived Empire

On June 13, 323 B.C., at Babylon, Alexander, not yet 33 years ears old, died of a fever — and with him died the unnatural dream of a mixed-race universal empire. Most of his Macedonian troops at once repudiated their Asiatic wives. His satraps began revolting. The various plans he had set in motion for homogenizing the culture and government of his vast realm became sidetracked.

Elements of Alexander’s empire survived long after his death. In Egypt, for example, the Macedonian Ptolemaic dynasty lasted three centuries; Queen Cleopatra was not an Egyptian by blood, but a Macedonian. And in the east, after the breakup of the empire, local rulers claimed descent from Alexander, even as late as modern times.

But the far-flung empire itself had no natural unity, no unity of blood or spirit; and even if Alexander had lived long enough to impose an artificial unity of coinage and dress and language and custom, it would still have required the strength of his unique personality to hold it together. And it is well that the empire died with him; otherwise it might have sucked the best blood out of Europe for centuries, in a vain effort to maintain it.

Lost Opportunity

The attractions of the vast and rich Orient for one Nordic conqueror after another are obvious. What is unfortunate is that none made racial considerations the basis of his program of conquest — and it could have been done.

Alexander, for example, could have laid the foundations for a Nordic empire which could have stood against the rest of the world — including Rome — forever. The Macedonians and the Greeks shared common blood and had similar languages (ancient Macedonian was an altogether different language from modern Macedonian, which has its roots in the sixth century A.D. conquest of Macedonia by Slavic tribes). If, before invading Asia and defeating the Asian armies, Alexander had devoted his energies to forging just these two peoples into a unified population base, casting out all the alien elements which had accumulated in Greece by the latter part of the fourth century B.C.; and if, while conquering Asia, he had carried out a policy of total extermination — then he could have colonized Asia with Nordic settlements from the Indus to the Nile, and they could have multiplied freely and expanded into the empty lands without danger of racial mixing.

But Alexander did not cleanse Greece of its Semitic merchants and moneylenders and its accumulated rabble of half-breeds, and he chose to base his Asiatic empire on the indigenous populations instead of on colonists. And so the Greco-Macedonian world, despite its uninterrupted prosperity and its maintenance of the appearance of might after Alexander’s death, continued its imperceptible downward slide toward oblivion.

Italian Prehistory

The focus of history shifted to the west, to the Italian peninsula. Before we can look at Italian history, however, we must temporarily return to prehistory.

In the seventh millennium B.C. the Neolithic Revolution arrived in the Italian peninsula, and a population base of Mediterranean race was established there. By the end of the second millennium, however, Mediterranean Italy had given way to a mixed Nordic-Mediterranean Italy. Over a period of at least 2,000 years groups of Nordic invaders had been coming over the Alps from central Europe and around the eastern end of the Alps from Illyria, on the opposite shore of the Adriatic Sea.

Just as in prehistoric Greece, a gradual Nordicization took place, first cultural and then racial. The earliest Nordics imposed their Indo-European languages and elements of their solar religion and patriarchal social institutions on the Mediterraneans. As later waves of invaders swept down on the peninsula they reinforced the earlier Nordic cultural influences and added new infusions of Nordic blood.

Arrival of the Latins

In the ninth century B.C. the last prehistoric wave of Nordic invaders arrived. They were the Latini, or Latins. Their origin appears to have been that portion of Europe around the middle Danube, Bohemia or Moravia though, of course, their ancestors had even earlier come from the ancient Nordic heartland in the east.

The Latins settled in the western coastal plain of central Italy, just south of the Tiber River, in the region which bears their name: Latium. They had a variety of neighbors. In the Apennine valleys to their northeast, east, and southeast lived the Sabines, Acquians, and Volscians, respectively. Other tribes in nearby sections of the Apennines were the Umbrians, the Marsians, and the Sabellians. All these tribes were substantially Nordic and, together with the most recently arrived Latins
constituted the Italic block of related tribes.

To the south of Latium, in the coastal region of Campania (the area around Naples), lived the Oscans, a Mediterranean tribe which had so far experienced relatively little interaction with any of the northern invaders.

Etruscans

And in the western coastal plain north of the Tiber River, extending as far northward as the Arno River, lived another Mediterranean people, the Etruscans. Scholars have had a great deal of difficulty in their attempts to translate Etruscan inscriptions. The language is non-Indo-European and appears to be, like Basque, one of the very rare instances of the survival of an indigenous Mediterranean language in Europe into historic times.

The Etruscans seem to have experienced some early Indo-European influences before their contact with the Latins, however; their religion, for example, exhibits a mixture of Nordic and Mediterranean elements, with their chief deity, Tinia, being an Indo-European-style storm god, much like the Latins’ later chief deity, Jupiter.

The Etruscans were undoubtedly the first civilized people in Italy. Like other Mediterraneans they had a strong mercantile instinct, and their wealth gave them an advantage over their rude, warring neighbors. In the eighth century they began expanding, establishing a number of new colonies, both along the Tyrrhenian coast and on Corsica.

Also in the eighth century the Greeks established their first coastal colonies in southern Italy.

Founding of Rome

The Latins, meanwhile, seem to have been spending most of their energies fighting with their Nordic neighbors in and around Latium — although, according to tradition, they did take time out to found the city of Rome (on April 21, 753 B.C., at about eight o’clock in the morning: so says Plutarch).

Just as the Dorians had been able to conquer the Achaeans, so were the Latins soon able to gain the ascendancy over their earlier arrived (and, hence, more racially mixed) neighbors. The Sabines (or, at least, the Sabine women) were one of the first Latin conquests.

But during the sixth century those Latins living in Rome came under the influence of their Etruscan neighbors and were ruled by a series of Etruscan kings

The last of these Etruscan kings, Tarquinius Superbus, was deposed and expelled from Rome by the Latins in 509 B.C., the traditional date for the establishment of the Roman Republic.

Rome’s Rise

For the next century the Latins of Rome carried on intermittent warfare with both the Etruscans to the north and their fellow Latins in the other cities of Latium. By the beginning of the fourth century the Romans had become the dominant power in central Italy, and the Etruscan danger had subsided, although it was 338 B.C. before the Romans had subdued the last of their warlike fellow Latins. (In 82 B.C. the Roman dictator Sulla achieved a final solution of the Etruscan problem by ordering a general massacre.)

At the beginning of the Roman Republic the Romans and other Latins were a racially and culturally mixed people. The invading Nordics had absorbed some Mediterranean blood, and their religion and customs had also been affected by Mediterranean influences. The Latin ruling class, however, and to a lesser extent the bulk of the Latin people, still retained strong Nordic characteristics, in both blood and culture.

In the next installment in this series we will look in detail at the subsequent history of Italy from a racial viewpoint.

a) ALEXANDER, son of Philip II of Macedonia, was the greatest conqueror the world has ever known. By the age of 30 he had led his small Macedonian army against all the armies of Asia, from Egypt to India, destroying them all and bringing a vast, mixed-race empire under his command. His inspired generalship and his organizational genius were matched by his unbounded energy and dynamism and his astounding personal courage and initiative. Always in the forefront of battle, wounded on numerous occasions, sharing every hardship with his soldiers, he rushed in where all else feared to go, whether it meant fording a swift river toward a hostile force which seemed to hold an impregnable position on the opposite bank, or going first up the scaling Wilder under a hail of enemy missiles from atop the fortifications of a besieged city. In his veins flowed the same Nordic blood as in the veins of Leonidas the Spartan, and in his soul burned the Faustian spirit of the Nordic race.

b) DACIAN warrior, captured by Romans, is portrayed in this second-century A.D. Roman statue. The Dacians occupied the territory of present-day Romania and were one of many related peoples in the Balkan area following the conquest of racially Mediterranean Old Europe by Nordics from beyond the Black Sea. If one judges by this statue, relatively unmixed Nordics still constituted the warrior class in Dacia in late Roman times.

c) NORDIC TRIBES, first in the Balkan area and in central Europe, and then in Italy, took over the leading roles in our race’s history as Greece declined through racial mixture and decadence into impotence.

THRACIAN HORSEMAN typified the hardy equestrian warriors who occupied the territory along the northeastern shore of the Aegean and the southwestern shore of the Black Sea in Classical and pre-Classical times. Thracians were one of the Nordic tribes who brought horses to this area from the Nordic homeland in southern Russia more than 6.000 years ago.

Today, when we speak of “Latins,” we reflexively think of short, swarthy, excitable people who are inordinately fond of loud rhythms, wine, spicy food, and seduction, and who aren’t to be taken very seriously. That is not an accurate image of all speakers of Romance languages, of course. Many individuals of French, Spanish, Portuguese, Italian, and Romanian nationality are as racially sound as the average Swede or German. Yet, the image persists, and for good reason.

But the Latini, the Northern tribesmen who settled Latium in the ninth century B.C. and founded Rome a century later, were something altogether different. Most of today’s Latins share nothing with those of 28 centuries ago except the name. Not only are the two strikingly different in appearance and temperament, but every element of the culture the original Latins created as an expression of their race-soul has been fundamentally transformed by those who claim that name today.

Even the character and tone of the modern languages derived from that of the Latini are profoundly different. The Romance languages, overburdened with vowels, have a soft, effeminate air that was never present in the language of the early Romans, which was as hard and manly as the people themselves. (The Romans did not say See-sar or Sis-ero; they said Kai-sar and Kick-ero.)

Virtuous Race

Above all, the Latini were a people to be taken seriously. They brought with them to Italy the spirit of the northern forests whence they had come. They took themselves and life very seriously indeed.

Duty, honor, responsibility: to the early Romans these were the elements which circumscribed a man’s life. Their virtues (the Latin root of the word means “manliness”) were strength of body and will, perseverance, sobriety, courage, hardiness, steadiness of purpose, attentiveness to detail, intelligence, and the characteristically Nordic will to order. Through these virtues they brought the world under their sway and created a civic edifice of such magnificence that it has ever since provided the standard against which all others are measured.

The Romans shaped the world around them — its institution, its politics, its attitudes, and its lifestyles — more extensively and more profoundly than anyone else has, and then they perished. That fact has fascinated and occupied the energies of historical scholars as no other topic. What were the reasons that the Romans rose so high and then fell so far?

Typically Indo-European

When they arrived in the Italian peninsula in the ninth century the Latins, like their Italic neighbors before them, brought with them institutions and customs which were typically Indo-European. In a great many ways they remind us of the Mycenaean Greeks described by Homer. In the social and political institutions of the early Romans, in particular, we can see elements which were as familiar to the Dorians three centuries earlier as they were to the Celts and Germans ten centuries later. Just as the languages of all these kindred Northern peoples were derived from a common source, so were their modes of organizing and governing themselves.

The earliest history of the Romans is partly shrouded in the mists of antiquity. The Latins were not as fond of writing books as were the Greeks, and only a few inscriptions in stone have come down to us from the time prior to the fifth century B.C. — and not a great deal after that, until the second century B.C. The oral traditions of the Roman people from the eighth century B.C. are a blend of myth and history and must be taken cum grano salis, as they would have said.

Son of Mars

For example, there are certainly mythical elements in the legend of Romulus, the supposed founder of Rome whose paternity the Romans attributed, significantly enough, to Mars, their god of war. Nevertheless, the modern consensus is that the legend is based on an actual person, even though essentially nothing is known with certainty of his life or of the events surrounding the founding of the city.

We are on somewhat firmer ground with the earliest Roman social and political structures and institutions. The most ancient traditions speak of the people of Rome at a time when they occupied only a large village on one of the seven hills on the left bank of the Tiber. Other tribes occupied neighboring hilltops. Two of these tribes, the Titienses and the Luceres, were Sabine and Etruscan, respectively.

The Roman people (populus Romanus) were divided into ten curiae (groups of men), and each curia consisted of a number of gentes (clans, or groups of related families).

Comrades in Arms

The populus ruled itself through a popular assembly; a council of elders; and several officials, or magistrates, the foremost of whom was the king. The assembly, the Comitia Curiata, consisted of all the comites, or comrades in arms, gathered together and grouped by curiae. The assembly bestowed upon the king and the other magistrates their imperium, or magisterial authority; approved or disapproved their edicts; and decided on such grave issues as peace or war.

The chief of each gens was a member of the council of elders, or Senate. According to tradition, there were originally 100 senators. The Senate presented measures to the assembly for approval and, during the monarchy, advised and assisted the king. The early Roman Senate served much the same function as its Spartan homologue, the Gerousia.

The king was chosen for life by the people (through the Comitia Curiata), from one of several leading families. As the chief magistrate, the king exercised the combined functions of warlord, high priest (pontifex maximus), and supreme judge. He wielded the power of life and death, and he approved the right of the elders to join the Senate. But, like all the other magistrates, he received his imperium from the populus.

Aristocrats Only

The populus Romanus, it should be noted, did not include every inhabitant of Rome. Initially, in fact, it included only those persons who were blood members of a gens: i.e., the nobles, or patricians. After the individual households (familiae), the gentes were the fundamental social units among the early Romans, just as among the other Indo-European peoples. Their origin predates the Latin invasion of Italy; those persons born into them were, thus, all descendants of the warrior clans which originally seized the land and subjugated the aborigines.

The members of this warrior nobility, the patricians, were originally the whole people; to them belonged everything: land, livestock, religion, and law. They alone possessed a clan name (nomen gentilicium) and the right to display a coat of arms (jus imaginum).

Those who were not patricians, and, hence, not members of the populus Romanus, were the plebeians (plebs). Although not originally permitted to participate in the political or religious institutions of the populus, the plebeians were technically free. Many of them were the pre-Latin inhabitants of the seven hills beside the Tiber on which Rome was built; some undoubtedly came into the area later, as Rome’s influence grew. No direct evidence remains on the matter, but it nevertheless seems certain that there was a racial as well as a social difference between patricians and plebeians, with the latter having much less Nordic blood than the former.

Spartan Eugenics

The patricians carefully safeguarded their racial quality at first, marrying only among themselves and practicing eugenic measures reminiscent of those of the Spartans. The earliest written Roman legal code, the Law of the Twelve Tables, which was first set down in writing about the middle of the fifth century B.C., but was based on a much older legal tradition, specifically called for the immediate destruction of any conspicuously defective infant.

Five centuries later this practice was reaffirmed by the Roman statesman, Lucius Annaeus Seneca (4 B.C-65 A.D.), who wrote in his De Ira: “We drown the weakling and the monstrosity. It is not passion, but reason, to I separate the useless from the fit.” Unlike Sparta, however, Rome left the final decision on the elimination of a weakly or deformed infant to the father, thus undermining the eugenic effectiveness of the practice.

Patrons and Clients

Several social and political developments worked to diminish the racial distinction between patrician and plebeian with the passage of time. One of these developments was the patron-client relationship; another was the incorporation of an Etruscan element into the Roman population, including the acceptance of a number of gentes of Etruscan nobles into the Roman patrician class; a third was the extension of citizenship to the plebs.

Clientship was in many ways a forerunner of medieval feudalism. A patrician family would, for one reason or another, establish a relationship with certain plebeians. The relationship might initially involve a small plot of land given to a plebeian family for its support, in return for which agricultural labor on the patrician’s land or a portion of the produce from the plebeian’s plot was expected.

Community of Interest

Once this community of interest between patrician and plebeian — between patron and client — was established, by whatever means, it tended to grow. Because plebeians had no legal rights, a patrician patron found it expedient to protect his clients in any dealings with the state and to look after their interests generally, so long as he valued the services they were rendering him. The client, likewise, found it to his advantage to support the interests of his patron.

Gradually, the mutual obligations between patron and client became binding on both parties; for either to neglect them was sacrilege. There came a time when it was the custom for plebeian clients to assume the gentile (clan) name of their patron. The patron-client relationship became hereditary, with the obligations involved on both sides passing from father to son.

As the social bond between patricians and plebeians grew, the social distance lessened. Many plebeians became, through hard work and good fortune, wealthy enough to rival the patrician class in their standard of living. And, although marriage between patrician and plebeian was strictly forbidden, there was nevertheless a flow of patrician genes into the plebeian class as a result of irregular liaisons between patrician men and plebeian women.

Latins, Sabines, Etruscans

Very early in its history, Romulus’ hilltop village of Latins joined forces with a neighboring village of Sabines, the Titienses. The Sabines and the Latins were of very closely related Indo-European stocks, and the amalgamation did little to change social institutions, other than doubling the number of senators.

A few years later, however, the Etruscan Luceres — of non-Indo-European stock — were absorbed by the growing Rome. Although the Etruscans remained a tribe apart from the Latin and Sabine inhabitants of the city, without patrician status, this condition was destined not to last.

Kings of Rome

Tradition gives the date 716 B.C. for the death of the Latin founder of Rome, Romulus. He had long before carried out the amalgamation of his tribe with the Titienses, and a year after he died the combined Latin-Sabine populus chose a Sabine, Numa Pompilius, as the second king of Rome.

For a century the kingship alternated between Latin and Sabine, but about the year 616 B.C. it passed to a man who was neither. He was Tarquinius Priscus (Tarquin the Elder) and was said to be the son of a Greek father and an Etruscan mother. How a half-Etruscan came to be king of the Romans is not clear; the traditional account is not convincing.

Probably what happened is that Rome suffered a military defeat at the hands of one of the powerful Etruscan communities on the other side of the Tiber. In any event, Tarquin forced the Romans to accept 100 new patrician families from among the Etruscan inhabitants of the city. Although the Etruscan patricians were accorded a status subordinate to that of the elders of the Latin and Sabine clans (the former were designated patres minorum gentium, or “fathers of the lesser clans”), time eventually blurred this distinction; the Etruscans entered the Senate, bringing the number of senators to 300, where it remained for more than five centuries, until the dictatorship of Julius Caesar.

Servian “Reforms”

It was Tarquin’s successor, Servius Tullius, however, who wrought changes which were to have much more profound racial consequences: in essence, Servius made the plebs a part of the populus Romanus. He accomplished this by overshadowing the patrician assembly, the Comitia Curiata, with two new popular assemblies, one civil and one military.

For administrative purposes, Servius divided the city and its territory into 30 “tribes.” These 30 administrative divisions, or wards, were tribal in name only, however; they were based solely on geography, and not on birth.

The patricians still ruled in the new Comitia Tributa, or tribal assembly, and provided the magistrates for the new wards, but Servius had laid the same groundwork for future political gains by the Roman plebs which Cleisthenes, just a few decades later, laid in Athens by reorganizing the tribal basis of the Athenian state along purely geographical lines.

Comitia Centuriata

In his military reorganization Servius went further. It is likely that even before his time some plebeians had begun to share military duties with the patricians, who had originally provided all of Rome’s warriors. But King Servius institutionalized the militarization of the plebs by carrying out a military census which categorized the whole Roman population, patricians and plebeians, on the basis of their wealth, and it was henceforth on this basis that they served in the army.

The census grouped the Romans into centuriae (literally, “hundreds,” although the actual number of men in a centuria varied greatly) and ranked them in classes according to the property they owned. With the first, or wealthiest, class of centuriae were included the mounted knights. A rich plebeian could be a knight as easily as a patrician could.

The centuriae assembled in the Comitia Centuriata to elect the highest magistrates, to approve laws put before them by the Senate, to decide on peace or war, and to serve as the highest court of appeal. Thus, the mixed patrician-plebeian assembly took over some of the most important powers of the all-patrician Comitia Curiata.

Gold over Blood

Servius certainly cannot be accused of being a democrat. Yet he clearly initiated the process which eventually led to the ascendancy of gold over blood in Roman society, just as Solon had done in Athens a few years earlier.

The successor of Servius Tullius, Tarquinius Superbus (Tarquin the Proud), partly repealed the changes the former had made. And Tarquin the Proud’s reign marked the end of Etruscan domination of Rome, as well as the end of the monarchy. The Tarquins were driven out of Rome by the Latins and Sabines in 509 B.C. (according to tradition), and the Roman Republic was born.

But the Etruscan kings (among whom Servius is included, although his origins and ethnicity are uncertain) had brought about two lasting changes which were racially significant: the Roman aristocracy of Indo-European Latins and Sabines had received a substantial non-Indo-European admixture by the admission of the nobility of the Luceres to patrician status, and the principle that citizenship (and its attendant rights and powers) should belong solely to the members of a racial elite had been compromised.

Four Factors

The following centuries saw the political power of the plebs increase greatly relative to that of the patricians, while wealth continued to gain weight relative to race and family.

The Romans survived the founding of the Republic by roughly a millennium, but we are not concerned in this series with the political and cultural details of their history, except as these details have a salient racial significance. Therefore, the emphasis in the following historical summary is rather different than that found in most textbooks on Roman history.

Let us focus on four factors: first, the growing racial diversity of the Roman state; second, the eventual decadence of Rome’s patricians; third, the differential in birthrates between Rome’s patrician and plebeian classes; and fourth, the effects on the Roman peasantry of large-scale slavery as a capitalist institution.

Non-White Immigration

The Romans were an energetic and martial people, and the power, influence, and wealth which they wielded grew enormously during the period from the end of the sixth to the last quarter of the first century B.C., the life-span of the Republic. First all of Italy, then the rest of the Mediterranean world and the Middle East, and finally much of Nordic Europe came into their possession.

This vast area under Roman rule was inhabited by a great diversity of races and peoples. As time passed, the rights of citizenship were extended to more and more of them.

Citizens or not, there was a huge influx of foreign peoples into Rome and the other parts of Italy. Some came as slaves, the spoils of Rome’s victorious wars, and many came voluntarily, attracted by Rome’s growing wealth.

After the Republic became the Empire, in the last quarter of the first century B.C., the flow of foreigners into Italy increased still further. The descendants of the Latin founders of Rome became a minority in their own country. Above all other factors, this influx of alien immigrants led to Rome’s demise and the extinction of the race which built her into the ruler of the world.

Medley of Races

The importance of the immigration factor is, of course, barely mentioned, if at all, in the school history texts being published today, because those who control the content of the textbooks have planned the same fate for White America as that which overtook White Rome.

Nevertheless, the writers of Classical antiquity themselves clearly recognized and wrote about the problem, as do those few of today’s professional historians with courage enough to buck the blackout on the mention of race in history. An example of the latter is the distinguished Swedish historian Martin Nilsson, for many years professor at the University of Lund.

In his Imperial Rome, Nilsson wrote: “Of greater variety than elsewhere was the medley of races in the capital, where individuals congregated from all quarters, either on business with the rulers and the government or as fortune seekers in the great city, where great possibilities were open to all. It is almost impossible for us to realize the extraordinarily motley character of the Roman mob. The only city in our own day which can rival it is Constantinople, the most cosmopolitan town in the world. Numerous passages in the works of Classical authors refer to it, from Cicero, who calls Rome a city formed by the confluence of nations, to Constantius, who, when he visited Rome, marveled at the haste with which all the human beings of the world flocked there….

“There were Romans who viewed the population of the capital with deep pessimism. In Nero’s time (37-68 A.D.) Lucan said that Rome was not peopled by its own citizens but filled with the scourings of the world. The Oriental (by Oriental, Nilsson means Levantine, not Mongoloid) element seems to have been especially strong.”

The Eternal Jew

Jews, in particular, in order to get their hands on the wealth there, flocked to Rome in such enormous numbers that Emperor Tiberius, under pressure from the common people on whom the Jews were preying, was obliged to order them all deported in 19 A.D. The Jews sneaked back in even greater numbers, and Tiberius’ brother, Emperor Claudius, was forced to renew the deportation order against them a few years later, but without success. They had become so numerous and so well entrenched that the emperor did not have the energy to dislodge them.

Another distinguished historian, the late Tenney Frank, professor at Bryn Mawr and Johns Hopkins, made a careful survey of Roman tomb inscriptions. He studied 13,900 inscriptions, separating them into categories based on the ethnicity or probable ethnicity indicated by the names and corollary evidence. Professor Frank estimated that by the end of the first century A.D. 90 per cent of the free plebeians in Rome were Levantines or part-Levantines. Fewer than ten per cent could claim unmixed Italian ancestry, and of these even fewer were of pure Indo-European stock.

Name-Changers

One problem which Frank ran into was the tendency of non-Italians to disguise their ancestry by changing their names. It was easy enough to separate Greek and Syrian and Hebrew names from Latin ones, but a Latin name which had been adopted rather than inherited could often only be detected by noting the non-Latin names of the parents on the same tomb. Then too, just as Jewish name-changers today often give themselves away by choosing a non-Jewish first name which has become so popular among their brethren that few non-Jews would dream of burdening their own children — with it (Murray, Seymour, Irving are examples), Frank found the same clues among many — “Latin” names.

As for the Greek names, the great majority of them did not belong to Hellenes but to Levantines from the remnants of Alexander’s Oriental empire. The Roman poet Juvenal (62-142 A.D.) alluded to this when he wrote:

“Sirs, I cannot bear
This Rome made Grecian; yet of all her dregs
How much is Greek? Long since Orontes’ (river in Syria) stream
Hath fouled our Tiber with his Syrian waters,
Bearing upon his bosom foreign speech
And foreign manners….”

Idlers and Crooks

Juvenal also wrote the following lines:

“Every land … daily pours
Its starving myriads forth. Hither they come
To batten on the genial soil of Rome,
Minions, then lords of every princely domain,
Grammarian, painter, augur, rhetorician,
Rope-dancer conjurer, fiddler, and physician”

C. Northcote Parkinson, the noted author and historian, sums up the effect of centuries of uncontrolled immigration in his East and West (1963): “Rome came to be peopled very largely by Levantines, Egyptians, Armenians, and Jews; by astrologers, tipsters, idlers, and crooks.”

The name “Roman,” in other words, came to mean as little as the name “American” is coming to mean today.

And yet, just as White Americans are bringing about their downfall through greed and timidity and indifference, so did Rome’s patricians cause their own end.

In Rome’s earliest days, when the populus Romanus was entirely of noble birth, duty, honor, and responsibility counted for everything, as mentioned above. A Roman valued nothing above his honor, put nothing before his obligations to the community. Even after Rome’s conquests brought wealth and luxury to her citizens, her patricians could still produce men like Regulus, stern, honorable, unyielding.

Bread and Circuses

But wealth inexorably undermined the old virtues. Decadence rotted the souls of the noble Romans. While the mongrel mobs were entertained by the debased spectacles in the Colosseum (not unlike the distraction of today’s rabble by non-stop television), the patricians indulged themselves with every new vice and luxury that money and a resourceful merchant class could provide. Pampered, perfumed, manicured, and attended by numerous slaves, the effete aristocracy of the first century A.D. was a far cry from the hard and disciplined ruling class of a few centuries earlier.

Just as there are Americans today who understand where the weakness and lack of discipline of their people are leading them and who speak out against these things, so were there Romans who tried to stem the tide of decadence engulfing the Republic. One of these was M. Porcius Cato (“the Censor”), whose public career spanned the first half of the second century B.C.

Cato was born and raised on his father’s farm and then spent 26 years fighting in Rome’s legions before entering politics. Early in his career, having been appointed governor (praetor) of Sardinia, Cato set the pattern he would follow the rest of his life: he expelled all the moneylenders from the island, earning the undying hatred of the Jews and a reputation as a fierce anti-Semite.

Archreactionary

Later Cato was elected censor in Rome. The duties of a censor were to safeguard public morality and virtue and to conduct a periodic census of people and property for military and tax purposes. Cato took these duties very seriously. He assessed jewelry and other luxury items at ten times their actual value, and he dealt promptly and severely with disorder and degeneracy.

In the Senate Cato spoke out repeatedly against the foreign influences in philosophy, religion, and lifestyle which were encroaching on the traditional Roman attitudes and manners. As a result, Rome’s “smart set” condemned him (privately, for he was too powerful to attack openly) as an archreactionary and an enemy of “progress.”

In the field of foreign policy, Cato was adamantly opposed to the integration of the Semitic East into the Roman world. He wanted Rome to concentrate on the western Mediterranean and to deal with the Levant only at sword point. Unfortunately, there were few men of Cato’s fiber left among the Romans by the second century.

Declining Birthrate

One of the most fateful effects of decadence was the drastic decline in the birthrate of the Roman nobility. Decadence is always accompanied by an increase in egoism, a shifting of focus from race and nation to the individual. Instead of looking on bearing and raising children as a duty to the state and a necessity for the perpetuation of their gens and tribe, upper-class Romans came to regard children as a hindrance, a limitation on their freedom and pleasure. The “liberation” of women also contributed heavily to this change in outlook.

The failure of the patrician class to reproduce itself alarmed those Roman leaders with a sense of responsibility to the future. Emperor Augustus tried strenuously to reverse the trend by issuing several decrees regarding family life. Heavy penalties were set for celibacy or for marriage with the descendants of slaves. Eventually, Augustus ordered that every noble Roman between the ages of 25 and 60 must be married or, at least, betrothed.

Suicide of the Nobility

In 9 A.D. tax advantages and other preferences were granted to the parents of three or more children; unmarried persons were barred from the public games and could not receive inheritances, while the childless married person could receive only half of any inheritance left to him.

All these measures failed. Augustus’ own daughter, Julia, was a thoroughly liberated member of the “jet set” of her time, who considered herself far too sophisticated to be burdened with motherhood; in embarrassment, Augustus banished her to an island.

From the dictatorship of Julius Caesar to the reign of Emperor Hadrian, a century and a half, one can trace the destinies of 45 leading patrician families: all but one died out during that period. Of 400 senatorial families on the public records in 65 A.D., during the reign of Nero, all trace of half of them had vanished by the reign of Nerva, a single generation later.

Rise of Capitalism

As the patricians declined in numbers, the Roman peasantry also suffered, but for a different reason. The later years of the Republic saw the rise of agricultural capitalism, with wealthy entrepreneurs buying up vast estates, working them with slaves and driving the freeborn small farmers out of the marketplace.

By the tens of thousands the Latin and Sabine yeomen were bankrupted and forced to abandon their farms. They fled to the city, where most of them were swallowed up in the urban mob.

“New Romans”

The capitalist nouveaux riches who came to wield much of the power and influence in Rome lost by the dwindling patricians were an altogether new type of Roman. Petronius’ fictional character Trimalchio is their archetype. Tenney Frank wrote of these “new Romans”:

“It is apparent that at least the political and moral qualities which counted most in the building of the Italian federation, the army organization, the provincial administrative system of the Republic, were the qualities most needed in holding the Empire together. And however brilliant the endowment of the new citizens, these qualities they lacked. The Trimalchios of the Empire were often shrewd and daring businessmen, but their first and obvious task, apparently was to climb by the ladder of quick profits to a social position in which their children, with Romanized names, could comfortably proceed to forget their forebears. The possession of wealth did not, as in the Republic, suggest certain duties toward the commonwealth.”

Different Spirit

Many historians have remarked on the fact that the entire spirit of the Roman Empire was radically different from that of the Roman Republic. The energy, foresight, common sense, and discipline which characterized the Republic were absent from the Empire. But that was because the race which built the Republic was largely absent from the Empire; it had been replaced by the dregs of the Orient.

The change in attitudes, values, and behavior was due to a change in blood. The changing racial composition of Rome during the Republic paved the way for the unchecked influx of Levantine blood, manners, and religion during the Empire.

But it also set the stage for a new ascendancy of the same Northern blood which had first given birth to the Roman people. We will look at the conquest of Rome by the Germans. First, however, we must backtrack and see what had been happening in the North during the rise and fall of Rome.

BOXED TEXT

Early Romans Were Hard on Selves, Enemies
Regulus: A Roman Hostage

As the pitiful drama of America squirming in the grip of the Ayatollah Khomeini continues to unfold, with more doubletalk from the White House and more shameful behavior on the part of American hostages and legislators alike every day, it is instructive to call to mind the way a Roman hostage behaved more than 2,200 years ago.

In the year 255 B.C., during the first Punic war, a Roman army under the consul Marcus Atilius Regulus was defeated in North Africa by the Carthaginians and their allies. Regulus and a number of his soldiers were taken prisoner.

Five years later, with the war going poorly for her, Carthage decided to sue for peace — or, failing that, for an exchange of prisoners. She sent an embassy to Rome, and she sent Regulus along with it, having first made him give his oath to return to Carthage if the embassy failed in its mission to secure the prisoner exchange.

When the embassy reached Rome, Regulus refused to enter the city, considering himself to have forfeited his rights as a Roman citizen and a senator by becoming a captive of Carthage. The Senate sent a delegation out to negotiate with the Carthaginians, and Regulus spoke to the Romans, advising them to reject every Carthaginian offer and to continue the prosecution of the war until Carthage was utterly subdued.

As for the prisoner exchange, “It is useless,” Regulus told his fellow Romans, “to ransom prisoners who have ignobly yielded with arms in their hands; let them be left to perish unheeded.”

The Senate decided to take Regulus’ advice, and the Carthaginian embassy prepared to return to Africa. Regulus’ friends and the members of his family did their utmost to persuade him to stay, but Regulus sternly refused: he had given his oath as a Roman. Indeed, he and all his friends were aware that if he stayed, it could only be as a dishonored man, shunned by all.

Regulus already knew well the diabolical cruelty of the Semitic Carthaginians, and when he arrived once again in Carthage they vented all their hatred and fury on him for causing the failure of their embassy. First his eyelids were torn off, and then he was rolled about in a barrel stuck through with nails; finally he was staked out in the African sun to die in slow agony from his numerous wounds. With him, of course, perished the other Roman captives.

The final Roman vengeance against Carthage, which left not one stone of that city standing on another and the land thereabout plowed with salt, is well known.

BOXED TEXT ILLUSTRATION

REGULUS RETURNS TO CARTHAGE (after the drawing by Mirys)

ILLUSTRATIONS

ROMAN LICTORS with their fasces, each of which consisted of an ax and a bundle of rods bound together with a ribbon. The fasces, comprising the instruments with which criminals were scourged and beheaded, were the symbol of the imperium vested in Rome’s higher magistrates. They remained the Roman symbol of authority after the monarchy had given way to an aristocracy and that, in turn to an oligarchy. The lictors attended the magistrates, cleared the way for them in public, and executed sentences of punishment.

a) CATO THE CENSOR (234-149 B.C.)

b) 3 unlabeled illustrations

In the last few installments we have dealt with those Indo-European peoples which, after leaving their homeland north of the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea, between the Urals and the Dnieper, invaded regions of the world heavily populated by alien races. Some — the Aryans, Kassites, Mitanni, Hittites, Phrygians, and Philistines — went into the Middle East, conquered the natives, and then gradually sank down into them through racial mixing over the course of millennia.

Others — the Achaeans, Dorians and Latins — went southwest, into the Greek and Italian peninsulas, conquered the aboriginal Mediterraneans already there, and founded the great civilizations of Classical antiquity. Although the racial differences between them and the natives were not as great as for those who went into the Middle East, mixing took its toll of these Indo-Europeans as well, and they gradually lost their original racial character.

Old Europe

A similar fate eventually befell many of those — the Macedonians, Dacians, Illyrians, Thracians, and others — who settled in the Balkan area north of the Greeks, in that portion of southeastern Europe which, like the Mediterranean coastal areas, had earlier been settled by Neolithic Mediterraneans and where the pre-Indo-European civilization we have called Old Europe developed. In those portions of Old Europe in which the Mediterranean population density was high, the Indo-European invaders lost much of their original racial quality through intermixture. In other parts of Old Europe the racial balance was more favorable to the Indo-Europeans, and mixture with the Mediterraneans did not have such profound effects.

But there were large areas of Europe which were never penetrated to any significant degree by Mediterraneans from the south during Neolithic times. The Cro-Magnon race, whose population was everywhere quite sparse, remained undisturbed in much of northern and western Europe until the arrival of Indo-European Nordics.

Four Indo-European Peoples

The Indo-Europeans who invaded these latter parts of Europe were able to remain racially pure, to a much greater extent than their cousins who invaded the more southerly and easterly regions, even to the present day. They established, in effect, a new Indo-European heartland in northern Europe. We shall look at four great divisions of these Indo-European peoples: the Celts, Germans, Balts, and Slavs.

These divisions are distinguished one from another by language, geography, and time of appearance on the stage of world history, as well as by their subsequent fates. But one salient fact should be kept in mind throughout the individual treatments of the Celts, Germans, Balts, and Slavs which follow: they are all branches from the same trunk.

Their languages all stem ultimately from a single Proto-Indo-European tongue, which formed at a time when all their ancestors lived together in the original Indo-European homeland in the steppes and forests of southern Russia. Since the departures of the various groups from this homeland at various times, the original tongue evolved in different directions, both through the normal processes of linguistic change with time and through admixture with the languages of the various non-Indo-European peoples with whom they subsequently came into contact.

Indo-Europeans Were Nordic

And both the fossil remains and the eyewitness accounts of Classical authors confirm that all these Indo-European peoples were racially Nordic. Because they settled in different areas after leaving the original homeland, and because they subsequently mixed with different races and to different extents, there are noticeable differences in various racial characteristics among their descendants today. But originally, Celt, German, Balt, and Slav were indistinguishably Nordic.

The Celts were the first group to make an impact on the Classical world, and so we will deal with them first. The “C” may be pronounced either with an “s” sound, the result of French influence, or with a “k” sound. The latter was the original pronunciation.)

From Hungary to Ireland

The reason the Celts interacted with the Greeks and Romans before the other groups did is that their wanderings took them farthest south. They invaded and settled in a great crescent stretching across central Europe from eastern Hungary and Czechoslovakia through Austria, southern Germany, Switzerland, and France into the British Isles. At the eastern and western ends of their range, respectively, isolated bands of Celts penetrated into central Asia Minor and the Iberian peninsula, while in the center quite substantial numbers crossed the Alps into northern Italy.

The Celtic languages have survived only at the extreme western end of the Celtic lands: Brittany, Wales, Scotland’s western Highlands, the Hebrides, and a few areas on the west coast of Ireland. Elsewhere the tongues of later Indo-European invaders Romans, Germans, and Slavs have replaced the original Celtic.

Celtic Heritage

Nevertheless, all the European peoples living today in those regions once settled by the Celts share, in greater or lesser degree, the Celtic racial heritage. The Roman conquest of southeastern Europe, Gaul, and Britain destroyed the greater part of Celtic culture, as well as doing an enormous amount of racial damage; the effects of the later German and Slavic incursions were largely limited to linguistic and other cultural changes.

But the Celts themselves, as much as anyone else, were responsible for the decline of their racial fortunes. They settled in regions of Europe which, although not so heavily Mediterraneanized as Greece and Italy, were much more so than the German, Baltic, and Slavic areas. And, as has so often been the case with the Indo-Europeans, for the most part they did not force the indigenous populations out of the areas they conquered, but made subjects of them instead.

Thus, many people who think of themselves as “Celts” today are actually more Mediterranean than Celtic. And others, with Latin, Germanic, or Slavic names, are actually of nearly unmixed Celtic descent.

Celtic Origins

In this installment we will look at the origins of the Celts and at their interaction with the Romans. In later installments we will deal with them again, when we look at the Germanic and Slavic peoples. There is an unavoidable arbitrariness involved in tracing the Celts back to their origins. In the beginning there was nothing to distinguish them from the other waves of mounted Nordic warriors who swept into Europe from the east over a period of thousands of years. Later they were a distinct people, with linguistic and other cultural traits which distinguished them from Germans and other Indo-Europeans. But the transition was gradual, making it difficult to assign a definite date to the origin of the Celts.

Unetice Culture

For some time prior to 2,000 B.C. groups of Indo-Europeans collectively known to archeologists as the “Battle-axe People” had been settling in east-central Europe, in the eastern part of the Celtic range described above. By 1,800 B.C. a well-developed Bronze Age culture, named after the Bohemian village of Unetice, near Prague, where archeologists have dug up many typical artifacts, had been established.

By 1,500 B.C. the Unetice culture, under the impact of a further influx of Battle-axe People from the east, had been transformed into the Tumulus culture, so called from the typical burial mounds associated with it. These burial mounds were similar to the kurgans which covered graves in the old Indo-European heartland. The builders of the Tumulus culture expanded it beyond the range of the older Unetice culture, shifting its center westward into Bavaria. Elements extended as far east as Hungary, however.

Proto-Celts

By 1,200 B.C. the Tumulus culture had given way to the Urnfield culture, in which mound burials were replaced by cremations and the subsequent burial of the ashes in ceramic urns. The Urnfield culture had spread, by 1,000 B.C., over much of eastern and central Europe and. had crossed the Rhine to the west and the Alps to the south. Most archeologists agree that the people who spread this culture were at least proto-Celts.

Throughout this period of cultural change and expansion, new immigrants continued to arrive from the east, playing a major role in the progression from Unetice to Tumulus to Urnfield. Finally, around 800 B C., the Bronze Age Urnfield culture gave way to a new, Iron Age culture, named after the Austrian village of Hallstatt, where archeologists have uncovered many typical tools, weapons, and skeletal remains. The Hallstatt burial practice was a partial reversion to the more Typically Indo-European form of the earlier Tumulus culture.

Celtic Iron Age

The Iron Age Hallstatt people were fully Celtic, and many archeologists regard 800 B.C. as an approximate date for the birth of the Celtic people and culture. Immigration from the east continued after 800 B.C., however, and so did Celtic cultural change and expansion.

By about 500 B.C. the Hallstatt culture had evolved into the La Tene culture, named after an archeological site on Lake Neuchatel, in Switzerland. The La Tene culture spread throughout the entire Celtic range, as far west as Ireland. On the continent it lasted only until the Roman conquest of most of the Celtic lands, but it survived in Ireland into the early Middle Ages.

Fastidious, Fair, and Fierce

The early Celts were not literate, and we are, therefore, dependent on Classical authors for much of what we know about Celtic mores, lifestyles, and behavior, as well as the physical appearance of the Celts themselves. The fourth-century Byzantine writer, Ammianus Marcellinus, drawing on reports from the first century B.C., tells us that the Celts (or Gauls, as the Romans called them) were fastidious, fair, and fierce:

“The Gauls are all exceedingly careful of cleanliness and neatness, nor in all the country … could any man or woman, however poor, be seen either dirty or ragged.

“Nearly all … are of a lofty stature, fair and of ruddy complexion: terrible from the sternness of their eyes, very quarrelsome, and of great pride and insolence. A whole troop of foreigners would not be able to withstand a single Gaul if he called his wife to his assistance, who is usually very strong and with blue eyes….”

Equestrian Warriors

All the Classical writers agree in their descriptions of the Celts as being tall, light-eyed, and with blond or red hair, which they wore long. Flowing, abundant mustaches seem to have been a Celtic national trait.

And the favorite national pastime seems to have been fighting. Born to the saddle and bred to arms, the Celts were a warlike race, always ready for a brawl. Excellent horsemen and swordsmen, they were heartily feared by all their enemies.

Perhaps we should not be surprised that these equestrian warriors invented chain-link armor and iron horseshoes and were the first to learn how to make seamless iron tires for wagons and war chariots. But the Celts were also the inventors of soap, which they introduced to the relatively unwashed Greeks and Romans. Their inventive genius also manifested itself in the numerous iron woodworking tools and agricultural implements which they developed.

Scythian Relatives

Master craftsmen, their artistry in metalwork was applied to bronze, silver, and gold, as well as to iron. Their art shows a close affinity to that of the Scythians, as their cousins still back in the old homeland were called by the Classical writers.

The early Celts were not an urban people. Their dwellings, typically of timber construction, tended to be isolated farmsteads or, at most, clusters of a few buildings surrounded by a palisade. They did not build castles, as such, but depended instead on strategically located hilltops, fortified with earthworks and palisades, as places of retreat in wartime.

Gradually these hill forts, or oppida (as the Romans called them), gained permanent inhabitants and enough amenities so that they could be considered towns. They became the sites of regular fairs and festivals, and centers of trade as well as defense.

Aristocrats and Intellectuals

Celtic society, following the customary Indo-European pattern, was hierarchical. At the top was a fighting and hunting aristocracy, always purely Celtic. At the bottom were the small farmers, the servants, and the petty craftsmen. The racial composition of this class varied from purely Celtic to mostly Mediterranean, depending on the region.

In pre-Christian Ireland there was an intellectual class which had a social status approximately equal to that of the warrior-landowners. This class consisted of druids (priests), bards, physicians, artists, and skilled craftsmen, who moved freely from petty kingdom to petty kingdom in a way that was not possible for any other class, thereby helping to maintain cultural unity throughout a wide area. A similar class served the same functions on the continent.

Importance of the Clan

Blood relationships counted for everything in the Celtic world. Not only was there a distinction between those of Celtic blood and those descended from the aborigines, but among the Celts themselves all obligations fell not just on the individual but on his extended family, or kindred group. Loyalty was owed by every member of the kindred group to every other member, and debts and injuries involving two men from different kindreds automatically involved every other member of their kindreds as well.

The Celts, like the other Indo-European peoples of northern Europe in pre-Christian times, revered natural beauty, including that of the human body. Relations between the sexes were open and natural, and — in contrast to the norm for Mediterranean societies — Celtic women were allowed a great deal of freedom.

Vilest Men

When the wife of Sulpicius Severus, a Romanized fourth-century historian, reproached the wife of a Celtic chieftain for the wanton ways of Celtic women, the Celtic woman replied: “We fulfill the demands of nature in a much better way than do you Roman women: for we consort openly with the best men, whereas you let yourselves be debauched in secret by the vilest.” In fourth-century Rome, of course, virtually all the wealth was in the hands of “the vilest” men: Jews, Syrians, and other Oriental immigrants who dominated commerce and constituted the nouveaux riches.

The ancestors of the Celts brought the solar religion of their Indo-European homeland with them to the areas they invaded; three-armed and four-armed swastikas, as solar symbols, are an omnipresent element in Celtic art, as is the four-spoked sun wheel. One of the most widely revered Celtic gods, Lug (or Lugh), had many of the attributes of the Germanic Wotan, and one of his designations, Longhanded Lug, referred to his role as a solar deity, whose life-giving force reached everywhere.

Dark Side of Druidism

By the time of the Roman conquest, however, many extraneous elements had become inseparably blended into Celtic religion. The druids practiced not only solar rites, but some rather dark and nasty ones of Mediterranean origin as well.

In some Celtic areas Mediterranean influences were much stronger than in others and influenced social structure as well as religion; the Celtic Picts, for example, adopted the matrilineal custom of the aborigines they conquered.

As mentioned above, the Urnfield culture had crossed the Rhine to the west and the Alps to the south by 1,000 B.C. Indo-Europeans, closely related to the Urnfield people and to the later Hallstatt and La Tene Celts, had crossed both these boundaries much earlier, in fact, and were in Britain well before 2,000 B.C. Throughout the Bronze Age and the Iron Age new groups of Indo-Europeans pushed westward.

6th- and 5th-Century Growth

Nevertheless, it was not until around 600 B.C. that fully developed Celts had established themselves in France. During the next 200 years, while expanding the area of France under Celtic settlement, they pushed across the English Channel into the British Isles (which owe their name to the Britanni, one of the Celtic tribes which invaded the islands during this period) and across the Pyrenees into the Iberian peninsula.

In southern France (Aquitania) and in Iberia they encountered and mixed with a well-established Mediterranean population. In central and northern France the population became much more Celtic. By the time of Caesar’s arrival in Gaul in the middle of the first century B.C., there was a fairly clear racial and cultural distinction between the mixed Celtiberian population in the Garonne valley and southward and the Celtic population to the north.

Caesar also distinguished between the Celts who occupied the region between the valley of the Garonne to the south and the Seine and Marne to the north, and the Belgae, who lived north of the Seine and Marne. The Belgae were apparently heavily Celticized Germans.

Celts, Germans Closely Related

Many later writers have not been as careful as Caesar was and tend to lump all Celtic-speaking populations together as “Gauls,” while sharply distinguishing them from the Germans. As a matter of fact, there was a much greater affinity between the Celts and the Germans, despite the language difference, than there was between the truly Celtic elements among the Gauls and the racially different but Celtic-speaking Mediterranean and Celtiberian elements.

In the British Isles the racial effects of the fifth-century B.C. Celtic invasions varied. In some areas indigenous Nordic populations were reinforced, and in others indigenous Mediterranean or mixed populations diluted the fresh Nordic wave.

Brennus Sacks Rome

Around 400 B.C. Celts invaded northern Italy in strength, establishing a permanent presence in the Po valley, between the Alps and the Apennines. They pushed out the resident Etruscans and Ligurians, founded the city of Milan, and began exploring possibilities for further expansion south of the Apennines.

In 390 B.C. a Celtic army under their chieftain Brennus defeated the Roman army and occupied Rome. The Celts were not prepared to stay, however, and upon payment of an enormous ransom in gold by the Romans they withdrew again to northern Italy.

In the following centuries there were repeated clashes between adventurous Celts and the people of the Classical civilizations to the south. In the third century B.C. a Celtic army ravaged Macedonia and struck deep into Greece, while another group of Celts, the Galatae, invaded central Asia Minor. Three centuries later the latter were still in place; they were the Galatians of the New Testament.

Founders of Belgrade

Also in the third century bands of Celts established enclaves in new areas all along the lower Danube; one such band settled in what is now Yugoslavia and founded the town of Singidunum, which is today called Belgrade.

But the Celts, unfortunately, despite their mobility and their intelligence, never formed a unified whole; they remained a collection of distinct tribes, as often hostile to one another as they were to non-Celts. This lack of unity brought their downfall.

Man against man, a Celt could usually beat a Roman; the Celts were at least as brave and as skilled in arms as the Romans, and the former were bigger and stronger, on the average, for the latter had by this time mixed for too many generations with southern races and lost most of the Nordic qualities of their forefathers. But the Romans had the supreme advantage of organization, without which little of lasting impact has ever been wrought in this world.

Celtic Sunset

Celtic bands continued to whip Roman armies, even to the end of the second century B.C., but then Roman military organization and discipline turned the tide. The first century B.C. was a time of unmitigated disaster for the Celts. Caesar’s conquest of Gaul was savage and bloody, with whole tribes, including women and children, being slaughtered by the Romans.

By the autumn of 54 B.C, Caesar had subdued Gaul, having destroyed 800 towns and villages and killed or enslaved more than three million Celts. And behind his armies came a horde of Roman-Jewish merchants and speculators, to batten on what was left of Gallic trade, industry, and agriculture like a swarm of locusts. Hundreds of thousands of blond, blue-eyed Celtic girls were marched south in chains, to be pawed over by greasy, Semitic flesh-merchants in Rome’s slave markets before being shipped out to fill the bordellos of the Levant.

Last Effort

Then began one, last, heroic effort by the Celts of Gaul to throw off the yoke of Rome, thereby regaining their honor and their freedom, and — whether consciously or not — reestablishing the superiority of Nordic mankind over the mongrel races of the south. The ancestors of the Romans had themselves established this superiority in centuries past, but by Caesar’s time Rome had sunk irretrievably into the quagmire of miscegenation and had become the enemy of the race which founded it.

The rebellion began with an attack by Ambiorix, king of the Celtic tribe of the Eburones, on a Roman fortress on the middle Moselle. It spread rapidly throughout most of northern and central Gaul. The Celts used guerrilla tactics against the Romans, ruthlessly burning their own villages and fields to deny the enemy food and then ambushing his vulnerable supply columns.

Vercingetorix

For two bloody years the uprising went on. Caesar surpassed his former cruelty and savagery in trying to put it down. When Celtic prisoners were taken, the Romans tortured them hideously before killing them. When the rebel town of Avaricum fell to Caesar’s legions, he ordered the massacre of its 40,000 inhabitants.

Meanwhile, a new leader of the Gallic Celts had come to the fore. He was Vercingetorix, king of the Arverni, the tribe which gave its name to France’s Auvergne region. His own name meant, in the Celtic tongue, “warrior king,” and he was well named.

Vercingetorix came closer than anyone else had to uniting the Celts. He was a charismatic leader, and his successes against the Romans, particularly at Gergovia, the principal town of the Arverni, roused the hopes of other Celtic peoples. Tribe after tribe joined his rebel confederation, and for a while it seemed as if Caesar might be driven from Gaul.

Tragedy of Alesia

But unity was still too new an experience for the Celts, nor could all their valor make up for their lack of the long experience of iron discipline which the Roman legionaries enjoyed. Too impetuous, too individualistic, too prone to rush headlong in pursuit of a temporary advantage instead of subjecting themselves always to the cooler-headed direction of their leaders, the Celts soon dissipated their chances of liberating Gaul.

Finally, in the summer of 52 B.C., Caesar’s legions penned up Vercingetorix and 80,000 of his followers in the walled town of, Alesia, on the upper Teaches of the Seine. Although an army of a quarter-million Celts, from 41 tribes, eventually came to relieve besieged Alesia, Caesar had had time to construct massive defenses for his army. While the encircled Alesians starved, the Celts outside the Roman lines wasted their strength in futile assaults on Caesar’s fortifications.

Savage End

In a valiant, self-sacrificing effort to save his people from being annihilated, Vercingetorix rode out of Alesia, on a late September day, and surrendered himself to Caesar. Caesar sent the Celtic king to Rome in chains, kept him in a dungeon for six years, and then, during the former’s triumphal procession of 46 B.C., had him publicly strangled and beheaded in the Forum, to the wild cheers of the city’s degraded, mongrel populace.

After the disaster at Alesia, the confederation Vercingetorix had put together crumbled, and Caesar had little trouble in extinguishing the last Celtic resistance in Gaul. He used his tried-and-true methods, which included chopping the hands off all the Celtic prisoners he took after one town, Uxellodunum, commanded by a loyal adjutant of Vercingetorix, surrendered to him.

Next: Germanic Expansion

Caesar did not live long enough to wreak the same havoc in Britain which he had in Gaul, but other Roman generals finished what he had started. During the first century A.D. Roman Britain was bloodily expanded to include everything in the British Isles except Caledonia (northern Scotland) and Hibernia (Ireland).

Decadent Rome did not long enjoy dominion of the Celtic lands, however, because another Indo-European people, the Germans, soon replaced the Latins as the masters of Europe.

ILLUSTRATIONS

a) INITIAL SETTLEMENT AREAS in Europe for Celts, Germans, Balts, and Slavs. The Celtic area was closest to the Classical civilizations of the Mediterranean.

b) CELTIC HILL FORT: These ruins in Shropshire, England, near the Welsh border date from the second century B.C.

c) SCYTHIANS, as they were called by the Greeks, were of the same Indo-European stock as the Celts. This drawing of a Scythian warrior is based on weapons, armor, and other items recovered from a fifth-century B.C. grave. The Celts shared many cultural traits with the Scythians and with a closely related Indo-European group, the Cimmerians. The latter were still immigrating into the Celtic area of Europe from the old Nordic heartland during the Hallstatt period.

d) CELTIC SUN-WHEEL, symbol of the Indo-European solar religion, was combined with the Christian crucifix in this tenth-century cross in County Louth, Ireland. Similar combinations are found throughout the areas of Celtic survival.

e) CELTIC HEAD: Detail from the Roman statue “The Dying Gaul.” The Roman sculpture is a marble copy of a Greek original in bronze depicting a wounded Celtic warrior, one of the Galatians defeated by a Greek army in Asia Minor in the third century B.C.

f) VERCINGETORIX SURRENDERS to Caesar. The Celtic king gives himself up to the Roman general in 52 B.C. outside besieged Alesia.

g) CELTIC coin with head of Vercingetorix.

Closely related to the Celts, whose fortunes we traced in the previous installment, and settled into the area of Europe directly north of them, were the Germans. Like the Celts, they immigrated into northern Europe over a period of many centuries; the first wave of Battle-Axe People to leave the ancient Nordic heartland in the forests and steppes of southern Russia appeared in the Germanic area of northern Europe even before the Neolithic Revolution had become well established there, prior to 4,000 B.C.

It would be incorrect, of course, to refer to these earliest Nordic immigrants as “Germans.” All that can be said of them, just as of those immigrants south of them who later gave birth to the Celts, is that they were Indo-Europeans. The process of cultural-ethnic differentiation — complicated by repeated waves of immigration from the old heartland, by mixing with the indigenous population there since at least Mesolithic times, and by internal migrations — had not resulted in the fairly clear-cut distinctions which allowed one group of people to be identified as Germans, another as Celts, and a third as Balts until approximately the first half of the first millennium B.C.

Scandinavian Origins

By about 2,000 B.C., however, the ancestors of the Germans — call them proto-Germans — were at home in southern Sweden, the Danish peninsula, and the adjacent lands between the Elbe and the Oder. To the east were the proto-Balts, to the west and south the proto-Celts.

From this tiny proto-German homeland, about the size of the state of Tennessee, the Germans expanded their dominion during the ensuing 3,000 years over all of Europe, from Iceland to the Urals, ruling over Celts, Balts, Slavs, Latins, and Greeks, as well as the non-Indo-European peoples of the Roman Empire. After that it was Germanic peoples, primarily, who discovered, settled, and conquered North America and who, until the internal decay of the last few decades, wielded effective political power even over the non-White hordes of Asia. and Africa.

Celtic Buffer

Was there some quality which distinguished the Germans from the Celts, so that the former were able to prevail over the decaying civilization to the south and the latter were not? Certainly not initially, for the two were of the same stock. Nevertheless, the Germans had two enormous advantages over the Celts.

First, the proto-German homeland was buffered from the imperialistic designs of the Romans by the Celts; the latter took the full brunt of the Roman armies, while the German homeland remained relatively inviolate. And yet the Germans, unlike the Balts and the Slavs, had just enough contact with the Romans to serve as a stimulus for their later invasions and conquest of the Roman Empire.

Fewer Southerners

Second, the proto-German area was much more sparsely settled by non-Indo-European aborigines than was the proto-Celtic area. The Neolithic Revolution had not fully established itself on the shores of the Baltic when the Indo-European ancestors of the Germans and the Balts began arriving. Consequently, there had been relatively little penetration of the area by farming peoples from the south — i.e., by Mediterraneans.

When the first wave of Indo-Europeans reached Scandinavia, they found a densely forested area inhabited mostly by the descendants of the Cro-Magnon big-game hunters who had peopled northern Europe during the Ice Ages. Although these early Indo-European invaders were themselves farmers, they were not wholly dependent on agriculture for their livelihood; they were hunters, stockbreeders, and traders even more than they were tillers of the soil. Above all , they were warriors.

Megalithic Period

The eighth installment in this series treated the arrival of the earliest Indo-Europeans in the proto-German area and their subsequent interaction with the local population. As described there, there eventually developed from this interaction the megalithic culture, which spread throughout the coastal regions of northwest Europe, including the proto-German area.

The oldest known megalithic tombs in Denmark and the surrounding area date back to 3,300 B.C. Skeletal remains and grave goods in these tombs indicate a proto-German society which was stratified, aristocratic, and patriarchal, and composed of people exhibiting both Nordic and Cro-Magnon racial traits.

Successive waves of Indo-Europeans entered the proto-German area from the southeast, reinforcing the Nordic racial element there and bringing about repeated cultural changes. One of the most important of these changes came toward the end of the third millennium B.C., with the first introduction of bronze tools and weapons into the area.

Mound Burials

A later change, around 1,500 B.C., saw the shift from megalithic, multiple-burial tombs to single graves covered with mounds of earth and stones. This change paralleled the rise of the Tumulus culture in the Celtic area and, like the latter, reflected renewed and intensified influence from the old Indo-European homeland beyond the Black Sea. The Scandinavian burial mounds of this Middle Bronze Age period were practically identical to the kurgan burials in the old homeland.

The Scandinavian area was congenial to the Bronze Age Germans. They lived, like the Celts, in small communities in forest clearings and in fortified hilltop villages. They wore garments woven from the wool of their sheep, with leather shoes, belts and other accessories. Their communities contained expert craftsmen and gifted artists, who worked in textiles, polished stone, wood , bone and walrus ivory, ceramics, bronze, copper, gold, and amber.

Significance of Amber

Amber is the fossilized resin of pine trees. Although it has been found in a number of locations, by far the most abundant source lies along the shores of the Baltic Sea. Enormous deposits of the lustrous organic mineral were laid down there about 60 million years ago, during the Tertiary Period, when dense pine forests along the south-central Baltic shore were drowned by one of the periodic encroachments of the sea onto the land. Amber is not only decorative and easy to carve and polish, but its interesting electrical properties (the word “electricity” itself comes from the Greek word for amber, elektron) have caused people to impute magical powers to it since prehistoric times.

Long before 2,000 B.C. amber became an article of commerce in Europe, with the luxury-craving civilizations of the Mediterranean and the Middle East trading metals and manufactured goods for the precious substance, which was fashioned primarily into jewelry, buttons, and other items of personal adornment. The beginning of the German Bronze Age was accompanied (and made possible) by an enormous increase in the amber trade. Their wealth of amber thus had important consequences for the early Germans: in an area in which the tin and copper ores needed for bronze smelting were scarce, it provided them early with imported metal for tools and weapons; and it stimulated them into probing far afield to open up new trade.

German Expansion

Despite the fact that the proto-German area was less developed agriculturally than neighboring lands, the Germans underwent a population explosion during the Bronze Age and the early Iron Age, and they steadily expanded their territory to the west, the south, and the east. By about 300 B.C. they had pushed across the Elbe, into Celtic territory, and advanced as far as the Rhine. Shortly thereafter the German Belgae crossed the Rhine and seized Celtic land down to the Seine and the Marne.

To the east the expanding Germans came up against the Balts, whom they gradually pushed back from the Oder toward the Vistula. By 300 B.C. the Germans had control of all the Baltic lands between the Oder and the Vistula, as far south as the Carpathians.

The Baltic Peoples

Let us interrupt our history of the early Germans just long enough to introduce the Balts. Later we will deal at length with the interaction between the Germans and the Balts during the Middle Ages.

While the ancestors of the Germans were settling southern Scandinavia, the ancestors of the Balts were occupying a considerable expanse of land to the east. The proto-Baltic area reached almost to the Oder River in the west. It stretched along the southeastern and eastern shore of the Baltic Sea as far north as the Gulf of Riga and as far inland as the present sites of Moscow to the east and Kursk, Kiev, and Warsaw to the south, encompassing the entire upper-Dnieper basin.

Finno-Ugrians

To the north and east of the proto-Balts were the primitive, non-Indo-European Finno-Ugric tribes. To the south, in the upper-Dniester to middle-Dnieper region, were the proto-Slavs.

Before the Indo-European ancestors of the Balts arrived in this area, it was sparsely inhabited by hunting-gathering-fishing Upper Paleolithic survivors who had earlier infiltrated from the east, bringing Mongoloid traits with them. Some of the Baltic graves from the period immediately after the Indo-European arrival contain skeletons showing Mongoloid admixture.

A continued influx of Indo-Europeans reinforced the Nordic racial element in the Baltic area, however, and, at least in the western portion of this area, a clear boundary between the Finno-Ugrians in the north and the Balts in the south was eventually established. This boundary corresponded roughly to the northern limit of deciduous/oak forests in eastern Europe.

The Balts were at home in the deciduous region, with its oaks and wildlife reminiscent of the ancient homeland, while the Finno-Ugrian hunter-fishers (ancestors of today’s semi-Mongoloid Lapps, Samoyeds, and other inhabitants of the European Arctic regions) found themselves better acclimated than the Indo-Europeans to the evergreen and tundra areas of the far north.

Maritime and Continental Balts

By the beginning of the Bronze Age in the Baltic settlement area, that area was effectively separated into two regions, and the inhabitants of those two regions were subject to rather different influences. To the west were the maritime Balts: those occupying eastern Pomerania, Poland, East Prussia, and western Lithuania and Latvia. To the east were the continental Balts: those in the region extending from eastern Latvia and Lithuania to the upper Volga basin.

The maritime Balts participated to a large extent in the Bronze Age cultural and economic developments of their German and Celtic cousins, trading amber to the Germans, who in turn carried it to the south. From the maritime Balts are descended the Prussians and the Curonians; in the Middle Ages the former inhabited the East Prussian area and the latter the western parts of Latvia and Lithuania.

Conservative Easterners

The continental or eastern Balts, on the other hand, were somewhat isolated from the progressive developments in central and northern Europe. Their neighbors were Finno-Ugrians, Cimmerians, proto-Scythians, and proto-Slavs. In the upper-Dnieper (White Russian) and upper-Volga (Great Russian) areas they coexisted with the non-Indo-European descendants of the hunting-fishing tribes who had been there when the proto-Balts arrived. Although they kept themselves apart from these more primitive people, the eastern Balts still were more conservative culturally than their western brothers.

The Balts as a whole, including the maritime Balts, preserved the cultural heritage of their ancient Indo-European ancestors to a far greater extent than did any other European people. They did not partake in the extensive migrations of the Iron Age Germans, and, after the initial amalgamation with the aborigines of the Baltic coast, were subject to fewer extraneous influences.

Most Archaic Language

Modern Lithuanian is the most archaic (i.e., closest to the original Proto-Indo-European tongue) of extant European languages. Like the extinct Sanskrit, it has preserved many of the most ancient Indo-European word roots. The resemblances between the two languages, in fact, taking into account their enormous separations in space and time, are uncanny. Consider, for example, the old proverb, “God gave teeth; God will give bread.” In Lithuanian it is: “Dievas dave dantis, Dievas duos duonos.” And in ancient Sanskrit: “Devas adadat dates; Devas dat dhanas.”

In religion as in language the Balts scorned alien influences. Even more sturdily than the Saxons or the Norsemen did they resist the fire and sword by which Christianity was imposed on the other peoples of northern Europe. Although the already Christianized German knights of the Teutonic Order forced the Baltic Prussians and Latvians to submit to the cross in the 13th century, the Baltic villagers of East Prussia continued to practice their Indo-European religion well into the l7th century.

Baltic Traditions Preserved

The Lithuanian nation officially subjected itself to the Pope in 1387, with the marriage of Lithuanian Grand Duke Jogaila to a Polish princess. In fact, however, Indo-European deities continued to be worshipped in the Lithuanian countryside for another 500 years, right up to the beginning of this century.

The chief Baltic deity was Dievas, the familiar Indo-European Sky Father (the modern Lithuanian common noun dievas, just as the Lettish dievs, actually means “sky”; both words are derived from the same Indo-European root which has given us “deity”). The number-two god was the Thunderer, the weather god. His name in Lithuanian was Perkunas; in Latvian, Perkons; in Prussian, Perkonis — all from the same Indo-European root as the Latin word for “oak” (quercus, originally percus), the sacred tree of the Indo-Europeans. Perkunas, of course, is cognate with the Germanic Donar, Thor.

One alien cultural element which did creep into the religion of the Balts soon after they had become thoroughly settled agriculturists was the feminine Earth Mother aspect of the religion of the Neolithic aborigines in the Baltic region. This was grafted onto the essentially solar religion of the proto-Balts, and the fertility rites of the Balts were commented on by their German conquerors during the Middle Ages.

Back to the Germans

As already mentioned, some 17 centuries before the Teutonic Order conquered the Baltic lands, German expansion eastward along the southern shore of the Baltic Sea had extended German settlement and rule from the Oder to the Vistula. At the same time, expansion was also taking place toward the west and the south, bringing about mingling — and often conflict — between Germans and Celts. With the Roman conquest of Gaul in the first century B.C., direct conflict between the expanding Germans and still mighty and expanding Rome became inevitable.

Actually the death struggle between Latins and Germans began even before Caesar’s subjection of Gaul. Late in the second century two neighboring German tribes, the Cimbrians and the Teutons, left their homes in the Danish peninsula because, they said, of the sinking of much of their low-lying land into the sea. Some 300,000 in number, they headed south, crossing the Tyrolese Alps into northern Italy in 113 B.C., where they asked the Romans for permission either to settle or to cross Roman territory into the Celtic lands to the west.

A Tragic End

The Roman consul, Papirius Carbo, attempted to halt them, and they defeated his army. The Germans then proceeded westward into Gaul and went as far as Spain, where they raised havoc. Ten years later, however, they returned to northern Italy.

This time they were met by a more competent Roman general, the consul Gaius Marius. In two horrendous battles, in 102 and 101 B.C., Marius virtually exterminated the Teutons and the Cimbrians. So many Teutons were massacred at Aquae Sextiae in 102 that, according to a contemporary Roman historian, their blood so fertilized the earth that the orchards there were especially fruitful for years afterward, and German bones were used to build fences around the vineyards.

More Conflict

At Vercelli the Cimbrians met a similar fate the following year; more than 100,000 were slaughtered. When the German women saw their men being defeated, they first slew their children and then killed themselves in order to avoid the shame of slavery.

The annihilation of these two German nations was followed by a few decades in which Italy remained relatively safe from further incursions from the north. The Germans’ territory was bounded, roughly, on the east by the Vistula and on the south by the Danube. In the west the boundary was less definite, and the Germans west of the Rhine came into repeated conflict with Roman armies in Gaul.

Tacitus on the Germans

The Romans were naturally curious about the teeming tribes of fierce, warlike people beyond the Rhine who dared contest their conquest of the lands in northern Gaul, and several Roman writers enumerated them and described their way of life, most notably the historian Gaius Cornelius Tacitus. Writing in a first-century Rome which was thoroughly mongrelized, Tacitus was strongly impressed by the Germans’ apparent racial homogeneity:

“I concur in opinion with those who deem the Germans never to have intermarried with other nations but to be a pure and unmixed race, stamped with a distinct character. Hence, a family likeness pervades the whole, though their numbers are so great. Their eyes are stern and blue, their hair ruddy, and their bodies large, powerful in sudden exertion, but impatient of toil and not at all capable of sustaining thirst and heat. They are accustomed by their climate to endure cold and hunger.”

German Women

When the Germans fight, wrote Tacitus, perhaps remembering the example of the Teutons and Cimbrians, “they have within hearing the yells of their women and the cries of their children These are the most revered witnesses of each man’s conduct and his most liberal applauders.

“…Tradition relates that armies beginning to give way have been rallied by the females, through the earnestness of their supplications, the interposition of their bodies, and the pictures they have drawn of impending slavery, a calamity which these people bear with more impatience for their women than themselves….”

If these appeals were not sufficient to elicit honorable behavior from each and every German, Tacitus added, their fellow tribesmen dealt with them severely: “Traitors and deserters are hanged; cowards and those guilty of unnatural practices are suffocated in mud under a hurdle.” Subject to the same punishment as cowards and homosexuals were draft dodgers: those who failed to present themselves for military service when summoned.

German Youth

The education of the German youth stressed not only bravery and skill in arms, but loyalty in the highest degree. Tacitus gives an interesting description of the mutual obligations between a German leader and his companions in arms:

“The Germans transact no business, public or private, without being armed, but it is not customary for any person to assume arms until the state has approved his ability to use them. Then, in the midst of the assembly, either one of the chiefs, or the father, or a relative, equips the youth with a shield and a spear. These are to them the manly gown (toga virilis); this is the first honor conferred on youth. Before, they are considered as part of a household; afterwards, of the state.

“The dignity of chieftain is bestowed even on mere lads whose descent is eminently illustrious or whose fathers have performed outstanding services to the public. They are associated, however, with those of mature strength who have already been declared capable of service…. (This) state of companionship has several degrees, determined by the judgment of him whom they follow.

The Importance of Loyalty

“There is a great emulation among the companions as to which shall possess the highest place in the favor of their chief, and among the chiefs as to which shall excel in the number and valor of this companions. It is their dignity and their strength always to be surrounded by a large body of select youth: an ornament in peace, a bulwark in war.

“In the field of battle it is disgraceful for the chief to be surpassed in valor, just as it is disgraceful for the companions not to equal their chief; but it is reproach and infamy during a whole succeeding life to retreat from the field surviving him. To aid and to protect him, to place their own gallant actions to the account of his glory, is their first and most sacred obligation. The chiefs fight for victory, the companions for their chief.”

Thus, already in Tacitus’ time, was the foundation in existence upon which the medieval institutions of chivalry and feudalism would rest.

Virtue, Hospitality, Freedom

The philosopher Lucius Annaeus Seneca, also writing in the first century, shared Tacitus’ respect for the Germans’ martial qualities: “Who are braver than the Germans? Who more impetuous in the charge? Who fonder of arms, in the use of which they are born and nourished, which are their only care?”

Caesar, Tacitus, and other writers also described other attributes of the Germans and various aspects of their lives: their shrines, like those of the Celts and the Balts, were in sacred groves, open to the sky; their family life (in Roman eyes) was remarkably virtuous, although the German predilection for strong drink and games of chance must have been sorely trying to wives; they were extraordinarily hospitable to strangers and fiercely resentful of any infringements on their own rights and freedoms; each man jealously guarded his honor, and a liar was held in worse repute than a murderer; usury and prostitution were unknown among them.

Ariovistus and Caesar

While the Romans were in the process of subduing the Gallic Celts, the latter were still squabbling among themselves, and one Celtic tribe involved in a struggle with a neighboring tribe invited Germans from the other side of the Rhine to come to its aid. Ariovistus, a chief of the Suabians, accepted the invitation, and along with 120,000 of his countrymen first defeated the Celts he had been called on to oppose and then those who had called him, taking possession of the greater portion of their land.

Other Celts, alarmed, asked Caesar’s help in 57 B.C., and he sent a summons to Ariovistus, demanding that the German chief come to him. Whereupon Ariovistus sent his famous reply: “When I need Caesar, I shall come to Caesar. If Caesar needs me, let him seek me. What business has he in my Gaul, which I have acquired in war?”

Defeat of the Suabians

Caesar accepted the challenge and marched immediately against Ariovistus. The two hosts engaged one another in what is now Alsace, not far from the present site of Muelhausen. The better discipline and tactical skill of the Romans prevailed, and those Suabians who were not slaughtered fled back across the Rhine.

During the next few years of Caesar’s campaign to subdue the remainder of Gaul — including those portions already occupied by Germans, such as the Belgae in the northeast — other tribes continued to cross the Rhine into Gaul, as the Suabians had done. Unlike the case with the Suabians, however, the Celts, having suffered severely at the hands of the Romans meanwhile, were more inclined now to regard the invading Germans as potential allies against Caesar than as enemies.

Caesar Crosses the Rhine

Caesar realized the danger this posed to him, and he made it a cardinal point of his strategy to discourage further German incursions into Gaul by reacting vigorously to each one. In 55 B.C. he built a wooden bridge across the Rhine, not far from the present site of Cologne, and took the war to the German side of the river.

The Germans, having learned to beware Caesar by this time, retreated eastward into the Westphalian forests, and the Romans spent 18 days ravaging German settlements and burning German crops before crossing the Rhine again. After this Rome claimed sovereignty over the entire western bank of the Rhine, all the way to its mouth.

Fateful Innovation

Two years later, during the last major Gallic uprising against Rome, Caesar again crossed the Rhine and ravaged Westphalia, in order to prevent the Germans from coming to the aid of the rebellious Celts. The following year he recruited German mercenaries from the portion of Westphalia which he had pacified, and they played a major role in helping him defeat the Celtic rebel chieftain, Vercingetorix, at Alesia.

When Caesar returned to Rome after mopping up the last Celtic resistance in Gaul, he took with him a German legion of 6,000 men, which afterward fought on his side during the Roman Civil War. This was the first time Rome had employed German mercenary soldiers on a large scale, and the new practice was to have fateful consequences for both Rome and Germany.

ILLUSTRATIONS

a) BRONZE AGE sun chariot, excavated at Trundholm, Denmark. The gilded-bronze solar disk, drawn by the sacred horse, was used in German religious rites more than 3,000 years ago.

b) THE WOOLEN blouse, string skirt, and belt, and the bronze belly ornament at the left were recovered from a Middle Bronze Age proto-German burial near Egtved, Denmark. The clothing belonged to a girl who was about 19-years-old at the time of her death from an unknown cause. She was placed in a coffin made from an oak log which had been split, hollowed out, and then carefully refitted together. She was buried beneath a in burial mound on a summer day (judging from the remnants of flowers in the coffin) about 3,250 years ago. Her body — especially her long, blond hair — was remarkably well preserved. The modern Danish girl on the right models a slightly more modest version of the Egtved girl’s costume (the original dress left the midriff bare).

c) BALTS were in contact with Germans in the west, Slavs in the south, primitive Finno-Ugrian tribes in the north and east.

d) SLAUGHTER of the migrating Cimbrians by Marius’ Roman army at Vercelli in 101 B.C.

e) GERMAN expansion from southern Scandinavia had filled north-central Europe between the Vistula, the Danube, and the Rhine by 300 B.C.

Julius Caesar’s conquest of all the Celts and Germans west of the Rhine and his punitive raids into the German lands on the other side of the river bought time for the Romans to concentrate their military efforts against the still independent Celts inhabiting the Swiss and Austrian Alps and the lowlands between the Alps and the Danube, from Lake Constance to Vienna. More than three decades of intermittent warfare by Caesar and his successors finally subdued these Celts, and their lands became the Roman provinces of Rhaetia, Noricum, and Pannonia.

Germania Magna

By 15 B.C. the Danube had been established as the dividing line between the Roman Empire and the free German lands to the north — or Germania Magna, as the Romans named this territory bounded on the west, the south, and the east by the Rhine, the Danube, and the Vistula, respectively. The conquered German lands west of the Rhine, in Alsace, Luxembourg, Belgium, and the southern Netherlands, were divided into the Roman provinces of Upper and Lower Germany.

In 12 B.C. Emperor Augustus sent his stepson Drusus, who had played a major role in the subjection of the Celts, to the mouth of the Rhine to launch an invasion of Germania Magna. Although initially unsuccessful, Drusus led repeated campaigns against the Germans, and by 9 B.C. had defeated several tribes, most notably the Chatti, and pushed more than 200 miles into Germania Magna, reaching the Elbe.

Tribal Names

At this point an aside on the names of the German tribes may be helpful; otherwise we may easily become confused by the proliferation of often-conflicting designations given to the various tribes and groupings of tribes by the Romans, the Germans, and others. Because the ancient Germans were, for most practical purposes, illiterate (the Germans’ runes were used for inscriptions but not for writing books), the earliest German tribal names we have are those recorded by the Romans: Batavi, Belgae, Chatti, Chauci, Cherusci, Cimbri, Eburones, Frisii, Gothones, Hermunduri, Langobardi, Marcomanni, Saxones, Suevi, Teutones, etc. It is assumed that in most cases these were reasonable approximations to the actual German names.

In some cases these tribal names assigned by the Romans of Caesar’s time have survived in the names of modern nations or provinces: Belgium, Saxony, Lombardy, Gotland, and so on. More often they have not; the great stirring up of the nations of Europe between the latter part of the second century and the middle of the sixth century A.D. — the Voelkerwanderung, or wandering of the peoples — profoundly changed the German tribal groupings. Some tribes vanished without a trace; others reappeared as elements in new tribal configurations which combined many of the older tribes.

Franks, Saxons, Alamanni

Thus, the Saxons of the eighth century consisted not only of the Saxones known to the Romans, but of many other tribal elements as well. The Franks likewise arose after Caesar’s time as a confederation of many German tribes.

The Romans referred to all the German tribes collectively as Germani, but this was apparently originally the name of only a single minor tribe, which later lost its independent existence. In similar manner the Romanized Franks of a later day referred to all their German neighbors by the name of a single tribal grouping which arose during the Voelkerwanderung, the Alamanni; the French name for any German is still allemand.

Teutons

The widespread use in the English-speaking world of “Teuton” and “Teutonic” in referring to Germans and things German is based on more than the name of the tribe annihilated by Marius at Aquae Sextiae, however; ‘Teutonic” comes from the same root as the word the inhabitants of modern Germany (Deutschland) apply to themselves and their language.

Originally deutsch (teutsch) simply meant “of the people.” The early Germans referred to themselves specifically by the name of the tribe into which they were born and generally as members of “the people,” comprising all the tribes of common blood, speech, and culture.

Since the rise of the various national states (France, Sweden, Denmark, England, Germany, etc.) founded by German tribes, the use of the adjective “German” to refer to all of them has had certain shortcomings. Today the word “Germanic” is preferred for references to modern peoples, tongues, and customs of ancient German origin which do not belong specifically to the modern state of Germany (Deutschland).

Conquests of Tiberius

Drusus fell off his horse and was killed during the campaign of 9 B.C. He was succeeded by his brother Tiberius (later to become emperor, on the death of Augustus in 14 A.D.), who continued the Roman conquest of German lands. By 7 B.C. he had subjected most of the territory between the Rhine and the Weser and a good bit of it between the Weser and the Elbe, including the Harz Mountain region inhabited by the Cherusci.

Over the next dozen years the Roman military machine continued to consolidate and expand its conquests in Germania Magna. Most of the independent tribes left were those east of the Elbe. Some, like the Marcomanni, had been forced to leave their ancestral lands in the west and resettle east of the Elbe in order to avoid defeat by the Romans. The Germans were on the defensive everywhere, and they seemed well on the way to suffering the collective fate of the Celts.

They were finally beginning to learn one vital lesson, however: they must either unite in the face of the common enemy or become extinct; the independence of the various tribes was a luxury they could no longer afford. A king of the Marcomanni, Marbod, succeeded in uniting most of the tribes east of the Elbe and organizing a standing draft army of 70,000 infantry and 4,000 cavalry from among them, the first time the Germans had accomplished such a feat.

Augustus, recognizing the threat, in 6 A.D. sent a force of 12 legions against Marbod, and, had he carried through with the campaign, almost certainly would have crushed Marbod’s army. At this moment, however, a serious revolt broke out in the recently subdued Celtic province of Pannonia and in neighboring Dalmatia, and it took the Romans three years to put it down. Augustus thought it prudent to make a treaty with Marbod for the time being, and the 12 legions intended for the annihilation of Marbod’s German league were switched to Pannonia and Dalmatia instead.

Rape of Germany

Meanwhile, the imperial representative in the conquered German lands was Publius Quintilius Varus, who was more a lawyer and a politician than a general. As an administrator he was brutal, arbitrary, and rapacious. Overturning all local customs, contemptuous of German tradition and sensibility, Varus applied the same measures against the tribes of Germania Magna which he had used earlier while he was proconsul in the Middle East and which Caesar had employed successfully to break the spirit of the Celts in Gaul. He succeeded instead in transforming the respect Germans had learned for Roman power into a bitter and implacable hatred.

The 19th-century English historian Edward Creasy describes especially well the German reaction to Varus and his army:

“…Accustomed to govern the depraved and debased natives of Syria, a country where courage in man and virtue in woman had for centuries been unknown, Varus thought that he might gratify his licentious and rapacious passions with equal impunity among the high-minded sons and pure-spirited daughters of Germany. When the general of any army sets the example of outrages of this description, he is soon faithfully imitated by his officers and surpassed by his still more brutal soldiery. The Romans now habitually indulged in those violations of the sanctity of the domestic shrine and those insults upon honor and modesty by which far less gallant spirits than those of our Teutonic ancestors have often been maddened into insurrection.”

Creasy’s contemporary Thomas Macauley, in his Lays of Ancient Rome, uses more poetic language in expressing the outrage caused by such Roman behavior in an earlier day:

“Spare us the inexpiable wrong, the unutterable shame,
That turns the coward’s heart to steel, the sluggard’s blood to flame;
Lest when our latest hope is fled ye taste of our despair,
And learn by proof, in some wild hour, how much the wretched dare.”

Hermann the Cheruscer

As the latter-day Romans were shortly to learn, the Germans dared a great deal. There came to the fore among the wretched, conquered tribes a German leader cast in the mold of the Celt Vercingetorix. Unlike the case with the latter, however, this new leader’s daring brought success. He was Hermann, son of Segimar, king of the Cherusci. The Romans called him Arminius. In Creasy’s words:

“It was part of the subtle policy of Rome to confer rank and privileges on the youth of the leading families in the nations which she wished to enslave. Among other young German chieftains Arminius and his brother, who were the heads of the noblest house in the tribe of the Cherusci, had been selected as fit objects for the exercise of this insidious system. Roman refinements and dignities succeeded in denationalizing the brother, who assumed the Roman name of Flavius and adhered to Rome throughout all her wars against his country. Arminius remained unbought by honors or wealth, uncorrupted by refinement or luxury. He aspired to and obtained from Roman enmity a higher title than ever could have been given him by Roman favor.”

Rottenness at the Core

Shortly before 1 A.D. Hermann went to Rome to learn the Roman ways and language. He was 17 or 18 years old. He served five years in a Roman legion and became a Roman citizen, a member of the equites, or knightly class. He was sent by Augustus to aid in the suppression of the rebellion in Pannonia and Dalmatia.

What Hermann learned about the Romans redoubled his hatred of them. Again, Creasy’s words on the subject can hardly be bettered:

“Vast, however, and admirably organized as the fabric of Roman power appeared on the frontiers and in the provinces, there was rottenness at the core. In Rome’s unceasing hostilities with foreign foes and still more in her long series of desolating civil wars, the free middle classes of Italy had almost wholly disappeared. Above the position which they had occupied an oligarchy of wealth had reared itself; beneath that position a degraded mass of poverty and misery was fermenting. Slaves, the chance sweepings of every conquered country, shoals of Africans, Sardinians, Asiatics, Illyrians, and others, made up the bulk of the population of the Italian peninsula. The foulest profligacy of manners was general in all ranks….

“With bitter indignation must the German chieftain have beheld all this and contrasted it with the rough worth of his own countrymen: their bravery, their fidelity to their word, their manly independence of spirit, their love of their national free institutions, and their loathing of every pollution and meanness. Above all he must have thought of the domestic virtues which hallowed a German home; of the respect there shown to the female character and of the pure affection by which that respect was repaid. His soul must have burned within him at the contemplation of such a race yielding to these debased Italians.”

Conservative Treason

When he returned to his people at the age of 25, Hermann was given a Roman command under Varus. He immediately set to work organizing a revolution. The most difficult obstacle he had to overcome was neither the Germans’ lack of military stores or even a single walled fortress, nor their traditional disunity; it was the opposition from the conservative faction among his own people.

As is always so with conservatives, they preferred immediate prosperity under Roman rule, through the trade opportunities it offered or through advantages bestowed on individual leaders by the Romans, to freedom, honor, and the long-range preservation and promotion of their own stock. One of the most hostile of these Romanized conservatives was Hermann’s own father-in-law. Nevertheless, Hermann prevailed over the conservative opposition and won most of the leaders of the Cherusci and the neighboring tribes to his conspiracy.

Call to Revolution

In the summer of 9 A.D. Varus’ army, consisting of five legions, was encamped among the Saxons, west of the Weser in the modern state of North Rhine-Westphalia. Late in the month of September Hermann contrived to have a localized rebellion break out among some tribes to the east, and messengers soon arrived at Varus’ camp with news of the insurrection. Varus immediately set out with three of his legions to crush the revolt, giving Hermann the task of gathering up the Romans’ German auxiliary forces and following him.

Hermann sprang his carefully planned trap. Instead of gathering an auxiliary force to support Varus, he sent his agents speeding the revolutionary call to the tribes, far and near.

Hermann then set out in pursuit of Varus, catching up with him amid the wild ravines, steep ridges, and tangled undergrowth of the Teutoburger Forest, about 20 miles west of the Weser, near the present town of Detmold. The progress of the Roman army had been severely hampered by the heavy autumn rains and the marshy condition of the ground, and Hermann fell on Varus’ legions with a suddenness and fury which sent the Romans reeling.

Battle of Teutoburger Forest

For nearly three days the battle raged with a ferocity which exacted a heavy toll from both sides. The Germans employed guerrilla tactics, suddenly attacking the floundering Roman columns from an unexpected quarter and then withdrawing into the dense forest before the Romans could group themselves into effective fighting formation, only to attack again from a different quarter.

On the third day of battle the exhausted remnants of Varus’ army panicked and broke, and the Germans annihilated them. Once more, we will let Creasy tell the story:

“The Roman officer who commanded the cavalry, Numonius Vala, rode off with his squadrons in the vain hope of escaping by thus abandoning his comrades. Unable to keep together or force their way across the woods and swamps, the horsemen were overpowered in detail and slaughtered to the last man…. Varus, after being severely wounded in a charge of the Germans against his part of the column, committed suicide to avoid falling into the hands of those whom he had exasperated by his oppressions. One of the lieutenant generals of the army fell fighting; the other surrendered to the enemy. But mercy to a fallen foe had never been a Roman virtue, and those among her legions who now laid down their arms in hope of quarter drank deep of the cup of suffering, which Rome had held to the lips of many a brave but unfortunate enemy. The infuriated Germans slaughtered their oppressors with deliberate ferocity, and those prisoners who were not hewn to pieces on the spot were only preserved to perish by a more cruel death in cold blood.”

First “Holocaust”

Only a tiny handful of Romans escaped from the Teutoburger Forest to carry the news of the catastrophe back to the Roman forts on the other side of the Rhine. Varus’ legions had been the pick of Rome’s army, and their destruction broke the back of the Roman imperium east of the Rhine.

A furious German populace rose up and exacted a grisly vengeance on Roman judges, Jewish speculators and slave dealers, and the civil servants Augustus had sent to administer the conquered territories. The two Roman legions remaining in Germania Magna were able to extricate themselves to Gaul only after hard fighting and severe losses.

The tidings struck Rome like a thunderclap of doom. The aged Augustus felt his throne tremble. He never fully recovered from the shock, and for months afterward he let his hair and beard grow, and was seen by his courtiers from time to time pounding his head in despair against the palace wall and crying out, “Oh, Varus, Varus, give me back my legions!”

Watershed of World History

Hermann’s great victory by no means ended the Roman threat to the Germans east of the Rhine, and many more battles were to be fought before Rome finally accepted, in 17 A.D., the Rhine and the Danube as a boundary between Roman and German territory. Clearly, though, that September day in 9 A.D. is a watershed of world history; the battle of the Teutoburger Forest is one of the half-dozen most decisive events in the history of the White race. Had Hermann lost that day to Varus, or had the conservatives among the Germans succeeded in aborting or betraying his revolution, the heart of Germany would have been Romanized. The land of the Angles and the Saxons and the Goths would have been permanently open, as was Rome, to the filth of the Levant: to Oriental customs and religion; to the mercantile spirit which places monetary gain above all else in life; to the swart, curly-haired men who swarmed in the marketplaces of the Mediterranean world, haggling over the interest on a loan or the price of a blond slave girl.

Nordic Survival

The Nordic spirit, the Faustian spirit, which is the unique possession of that race which burst into Europe from the eastern steppes more than 6,000 years ago; the spirit which carried Greece to the heights and impelled the earliest Romans to impose a new order on the Italian peninsula; the spirit which had eventually succumbed to racial decay in the south and which had been crushed out of the Celts of Gaul and Britain — that spirit would also have been crushed out of the Germans and replaced by the spirit of the lawyers and the moneychangers.

The fact that that spirit survived in the Germans, that it thrived again in Britain after the Saxon conquest, that it lived in the Vikings who sailed their dragon ships across the Atlantic to the New World five centuries after that, that after another 10 centuries it carried our race beyond the bounds of this planet — is due in very large measure to the passion, energy, skill, and courage of Hermann the Cheruscer.

Rome on the Defensive

Four hundred years were yet to pass and a great deal more German blood shed before the German ascendancy over Rome became final and irreversible, but the events of 9 A.D. presaged everything which followed. After Hermann’s mighty feat the decaying Roman Empire was almost continuously on the defensive rather than the offensive. Although the southwestern corner of Germania Magna, encompassing the headwaters of the Rhine and the Danube (the area which had been abandoned by the Marcomanni prior to the Hermannschlacht), was later colonized by Rome; and although Emperor Trajan added the trans-Danubian province of Dacia to Rome’s possessions at the beginning of the second century, no really serious program of conquest of German lands was again attempted.

The German unity which Hermann forged did not last long, unfortunately. Although he outmaneuvered his rival Marbod, who was forced to seek Roman protection, Hermann himself lost his life to an assassin a few years later. Traditional intertribal rivalries and jealousies came to the fore again. Just as Roman decadence prevented the Romans from conquering the Germans in the ensuing decades, so did German disunity prevent the reverse.

Five Decisive Things

During the 401 years between Hermann’s victory in the Teutoburger Forest and the sacking of the city of Rome by a German army in August 410, a great many things of historical importance occurred. We will be able to look at only a few of them in detail, however; we do not want to be distracted from our history of the race by the minutiae of political history, no matter how important.

Five things which happened or were ongoing during this period stand out as decisive, from a racial viewpoint. First, there was the continued decadence of the Romans, a matter we have already treated. Second, there was the growing Germanization of the Roman army. Third, there was the migration of the Goths from their home in Scandinavia back to the ancient Indo-European homeland in southern Russia. Fourth, there was the invasion of Europe by a non-White horde from the Far East: the Huns. And fifth, there was the final undermining of Roman strength by the spread of a new religion from the Levant — an Oriental religion of pacifism and egalitarianism which also began to have an effect on the Germans.

Too Civilized to Fight

Julius Caesar recruited the first legion of German mercenaries in 52 B.C., and his successors imitated his example — in part because the Germans made excellent soldiers, and, increasingly, because Rome could no longer supply her military needs from among the debased population of Italy. The Cambridge historian J.B. Bury observes that, from the latter part of the second century on, “in the old civilized countries around the Mediterranean Sea the population had become quite useless for military service. They were too highly civilized and not physically fit enough, on the average, to do hand-to-hand fighting with the uncivilized barbarians.”

When Marcus Aurelius, the last Roman emperor able to inspire any real fear or respect in the Germans, tried to recruit troops to defend Rome’s Danubian border in 168, not even the threat of death induced Italians to enlist in the legions. The emperor finally resorted to conscripting all of Rome’s gladiators, most of whom were Celtic or German prisoners of war, into the army, whereupon the Roman masses, as addicted to their spectator sports as America’s masses are to their TV, threatened insurrection. “He deprives us of our amusements,” the populace cried out in anger against the emperor, “in order to make us philosophers like himself.” As they had become less martial, the Romans — or, rather, the Jews, Syrians, Egyptians and debased Greeks of the Empire who unworthily bore that once-honorable name — had grown ever more fond of the cruel blood sports of the Colosseum.

All-Volunteer Army

Until the end of the third century law prohibited the enlistment of foreigners in the Roman army. Although the law was often violated, it resulted in most of Rome’s soldiers being recruited from among the Celts and Germans of the conquered provinces during a period of about 150 years. By the time of Constantine not even the provinces could provide enough soldiers to defend the degenerate Roman Empire, and the greatest source of military manpower became the free Germans, who enlisted for purely mercenary motives.

By the middle of the fourth century, the Roman army was Roman in name only. Germans not only filled the ranks, but most of the officers, up to the highest levels of command, were Germans as well. Thus, the more or less continual state of war which existed between the free Germans and the Roman Empire during the third, fourth, and fifth centuries — up until 476, when the last Roman emperor was deposed and banished and a German leader ruled Italy as king — was not fought between Germans and Romans, but between Germans on the one side and Germans on the other.

Gold for Blood

The Romans bought their protection instead of fighting for it. Gold paid for blood for more than 200 years, but in the end all their money and their civilized cleverness were not enough.

If the Germans could have added a stronger sense of racial solidarity to their other virtues, they could have put an end to the sewer that was Rome 200 or even 300 years sooner than they did. They would not only have avoided spilling torrents of their own blood, but they could have stamped out a source of poison that, allowed to continue festering, ultimately would infect them.

Declining Rome’s many wars with the Germans involved a number of tribes. The incursions across the Danube into Pannonia that Marcus Aurelius bloodily repulsed in the second century were by tribes confederated with .the Marcomanni, for example. During the third and fourth centuries the Franks raided across the Rhine into Gaul, and the Saxons harassed the coasts of that country and Britain. But it was the Goths above all the others who wrote the final chapters of the struggle between Germany and Rome.

Gothic Victory

Although Greek explorers had visited the Goths along the shores of the Baltic in the fourth century B.C., it was the middle of the third century A.D. before the Romans encountered them, and by then they were 800 miles from the Baltic, in the Danubian province of Dacia. After several skirmishes between Goths and Romans along the lower Danube, in the year 251 the Goths inflicted the worst defeat on the Romans they had suffered since the Hermannschlacht, annihilating a Roman army and killing its commander, the emperor Decius. Within two more decades Rome had abandoned all claim to Dacia, and the province which Trajan had conquered 150 years earlier was thenceforth firmly in German hands, with the Danube once again the border between Rome and Germany.

Visigoths and Ostrogoths

Sometime prior to 300 B.C. the Goths had begun sailing across the Baltic from southern Sweden to the region near the mouth of the Vistula, pushing the Balts already settled there eastward. Some 500 years later, toward the end of the second century A.D., the Goths began moving southeastward again, through the territory of the Slavs (whom we shall examine in the next installment) and into the lands north of the Black Sea, whence their ancestors had come in the remote and forgotten past.

With time they became separated by geography into two great divisions: the Visigoths, or West Goths, who occupied the territory from the Danube to the Dniester; and the Ostrogoths, or East Goths, who settled in the region from the Dniester eastward to the Volga. It was the Visigoths who invaded Dacia in the third century and wrested it away from the Romans.

ILLUSTRATIONS

a) HERMANN THE CHERUSCER
Tacitus, Rome’s most prominent historian, wrote of Hermann nearly a century after his death: “Assuredly he was the savior of Germany. He did not, like other kings and generals, defy Rome in her period of weakness, but at the time of her greatest strength. Not invariably fortunate, he remained unconquered in war. He completed 37 years of life, 12 years as leader of his people. He is still celebrated in the songs of the barbarian nations ….”

b) HERMANNSCHLACHT (Hermann’s battle) of 9 A.D. was one of the most decisive events in the history of the White race. By uniting traditionally independent and jealous German tribes in the face of strong opposition from conservatives, by luring the Roman army from its camp and onto ground where it was unable to benefit from its superior training and discipline, and by employing guerrilla tactics, Prince Hermann of the Cherusci was able to annihilate the previously invincible Romans and eliminate the race-destroying influence of Rome east of the Rhine. His life is one of the strongest proofs of the decisive role played in world history by individual men of extraordinary character.

c) HERMANN memorial, Detmold. Germans of succeeding generations paid tribute to Hermann as a divine hero. The Irminsul (Hermann’s column) was erected after Hermann’s death and served as a German religious shrine for approximately 750 years, until its destruction by the Christianized Franks in the eighth century. Ten and a half centuries after the destruction of the Irininsul and 18 centuries after Hermann’s death the Germans erected this 80-foot bronze statue of their foremost national hero on the highest point of land In the Teutoburger Forest.

d) THE DECAPITATION of the German nobility in Pannonia by Roman troops during the reign of Emperor Marcus Aurelius (161-180 A.D.). Although Rome never again attempted or even envisioned conquering Germany after the time of Hermann, it was 400 years before the Germans were able to conquer Rome. During that period many bloody conflicts took place in Rome’s far-flung provinces as Germans pressed irresistibly against her embattled borders.

The Gothic nation, as was mentioned in the previous installment, had established itself on the southern shore of the Baltic, around the mouth of the Vistula, before 300 B.C. Prior to that the Goths had lived in southern Sweden.

Like the other Germans of their time, the Goths were tall, sturdily built, and Nordic in coloration, with blue or grey eyes and hair colors ranging from red to almost white. Roman reports describe them as the tallest of the Germans, with especially large hands and feet — perhaps a trait resulting from the local mixture of Indo-European and Cro-Magnon races in Sweden.

Soon they were also the richest of the Germans. In direct contact with the amber-gathering Baltic tribes to the east, the Goths monopolized the amber trade. For centuries Gothic caravans loaded with furs and amber pushed southward to sell their goods in the trading centers of the Roman Empire.

Gothic Migration

Then, in the third quarter of the second century of the present era, during the reign of Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius, the Goths began a general movement to the southeast. Hundreds of thousands of them, taking their families, their cattle, and all their household goods, marched back toward the ancient Indo-European homeland their ancestors had left thousands of years earlier.

Historians can only speculate on the cause of this great migration: overpopulation in the Gothic north, local depletion of the soil, the lure of potential conquests, or the disruption and pressure caused by the movement of nearby tribes. Whether the last was a cause of the Gothic trek or not, it was certainly a concomitant; whenever one tribe moved to a new territory, it almost necessarily set into motion an ever-spreading, domino-like sequence of moves among other tribes. The Gothic movement to the southeast was accompanied by a greatly increased German pressure on the Roman Empire’s northern border, as Marcomanni, Chatti, Quadi, and other tribes attacked repeatedly along the broad Danubian front.

The Early Slavs

The migration of the Goths also affected another people: the Slavs, through whose lands the Goths passed. The Slavs — or, better, those whose descendants were later known to the world as Slavs — were, like the Celts, Germans, and Balts (and also the earliest Romans and Greeks), an Indo-European people, and, therefore, of Nordic race.

The origin of the word “Slav” (and its immediate relatives, such as “Slovene”) has been disputed by the etymologists. Some see the Slavic word slava, meaning “glory,” as the source; this is the meaning of the ending “-slav” in such Slavic personal names as Boguslav and Miroslav. Others trace the word to the Slavic slovo, meaning “word” (i.e., the Slavs are all those sharing the same tongue); slowien, meaning “flax” (a symbol of purity among the early Slavs); or slova, meaning “marsh” (an allusion to the marshy condition of portions of the Slavic homeland).

Closest to Home

Of all the Indo-European peoples who carved out new homelands for themselves in Europe during the Neolithic and the early Bronze Age, the ancestors of the Slavs stayed closest to the ancient homeland in the steppes of southern Russia. Some 100 to 200 miles north of the Black Sea the Pontic steppe of ancient times merged into a region of mixed forest and grassland, more suitable for farming and less for grazing than the steppe itself. It was into this region, centered on the middle Dnieper basin and stretching some 600 miles from the Carpathians in the west to the upper Donets basin in the east, roughly from modern Lvov to Kharkov, that the Indo-European ancestors of the Slavs moved prior to 2,000 B.C.

Despite their proximity to the old homeland, however, these proto-Slavs apparently made a more complete transformation in lifestyle, from wide-ranging mounted warriors and pastoralists to settled farmers, than any other Indo-European group. Although their nobility in later times — actually the descendants of their Scythian conquerors — rode horses, the Slavs entered history on foot rather than on horseback like the other Indo-Europeans.

“Scythian Farmers”

By about 1,000 B.C. the proto-Slavic area of Europe had shifted somewhat westward, encompassing the upper Vistula valley. And around 700 B.C. the entire area was conquered by Scythians, an Indo-European warrior-people from the south. When the Greek historian Herodotus wrote of the Slavs in the fifth century B.C., he referred to them as “Scythian farmers,” although he distinguished them from the Scythians proper, or Royal Scythians, the warrior aristocracy which ruled a dozen conquered peoples.

By 200 B.C. the Sarmatians had replaced the Scythians as the rulers of the Pontic steppe, and they, in turn, conquered much of the Slavic territory to the north of them. The Sarmatians, a confederation of Iranian-speaking tribes, were the last of the great Indo-European peoples to leave the ancient homeland. During the fourth century B.C. they had come from the steppe between the Don and the Volga.

And 400 years after the Sarmatians, the Goths conquered the Slavs. In each case, of course — Scyths, Sarmatians, Goths — there was also a blending of peoples, all of whom had originally come from the same Indo-European stock. Because of these repeated conquests and blendings during the prehistoric period, it is not entirely accurate to speak of “Slavs,” as a known ethnic entity, prior to about the sixth century A.D.

Tall, Strong, Ruddy

By then their literate neighbors had gained quite a bit of experience of the Slavs, and we have written descriptions dating from that century, most notably in the writings of Jordanes the Goth and Procopius the Greek. Procopius says of the Slavs: “All of them are tall and very strong; their skin and hair are neither very light nor dark, but all are ruddy of face.” Procopius also describes them as “just as dirty” as the Thracians, but this was a judgment which the Greeks and Romans routinely passed on all the northern barbarians.

Despite their more complete acculturation to the settled, farming lifestyle than the other peoples of the north, the Slavs retained the typically Indo-European spiritual and cultural traits of their ancestors. They were sun-worshippers, and their god Perun, a vigorous, red-bearded deity who wielded a mighty hammer and rode in a chariot drawn by a goat, is clearly just a Slavic version of the Balts’ Perkunas and the Germans’ Donar (Thor). Although the bulk of the Slavs were subjected to Christianity in the ninth and tenth centuries, the old religion persisted in some areas into the 12th century.

Lack of Unity

Early Slavic society followed the patriarchal and patrilinear pattern of other Indo-European societies, but it also seems to have adopted certain aspects of the decentralized, quasi-democratic social forms typical of early Mediterranean farming societies. The lack of a strong aristocracy undoubtedly made the Slavs an easier prey for their various conquerors. It was not until the eighth century A.D., much later than other Indo-European groups, that the Slavs began developing a highly centralized society, culminating in the ninth century in the first Slavic national state, Great Moravia.

As early as the beginning of the fifth century, however, events which brought about a collapse of order in the German-Roman world presented the Slavs with both the opportunity and the necessity of breaking out of their more-or-less passive pattern of the past. Throughout the fifth, sixth, and early seventh centuries, Slavic militance and expansion played a major role in the drastic changes which were taking place in Europe.

These changes carried the Slavs from their Ukrainian homeland into the Balkan peninsula and into central Europe as far as the Elbe basin. By the middle of the seventh century Slavic tribesmen had seized the Adriatic coastlands from the Romans and had settled along the western Baltic coast, in the region later known as Pomerania.

Conquest of the Steppe

But we are getting nearly 500 years ahead of our story, and we must return to the Goths, who in the last years of the second century and the first years of the third were migrating through the Slavic homeland on their way to the coastlands of the Black Sea.

When the Goths reached the seacoast, some of them turned to the east and some to the west and southwest, the two streams of migration diverging near the mouth of the Dniester. Those who turned east conquered all before them, reaching the Don about the year 250. They became known as the East Goths, or Ostrogoths, and they set up an Ostrogothic kingdom which encompassed the heart of the ancient home of the Indo-Europeans, ruling the steppe and the forest-steppe from the Dniester to the Volga.

To the south of them, between the lower Don and the Caucasus Mountains, lived several Sarmatian tribes, the most prominent of these being the Alans. They had been the last rulers of the steppe before the arrival of the Goths. To the east of the Ostrogoths lay the vast plains and deserts which stretched away into central Asia.

West Goths

The Goths west of the Dniester — the Visigoths — moved down into the Danubian lands west of the Black Sea, where they inevitably came into conflict with the Romans. They conquered the Roman province of Dacia for themselves, after defeating a Roman army and killing a Roman emperor (Decius) in the year 251.

For the next century and a quarter both the Visigoths and the Ostrogoths prospered, while the fortunes of the Roman Empire continued to decline. The Goths, who were excellent seamen, raided the Black Sea coastal cities of Asia Minor at will, and Rome was also hard pressed to defend other portions of her long border with the Germans.

Peaceful Coexistence

Toward the end of the third century, during the reign of Diocletian, the Empire was divided into eastern and western halves, for administrative and military purposes. The progressive breakdown of communications led eventually to separate de facto Powers, one centered in Rome and the other in Byzantium (later renamed Constantinople).

During the first three-quarters of the fourth century, despite occasional raids, a state of relatively peaceful coexistence between Goths and Romans pervaded. Especially in the eastern half of the Empire, diplomacy and bribery were used to hold the Goths at bay. During the reign of Constantine (306-337) 40,000 Goths were recruited into the Roman army, and they thenceforth were the bulwark of the Eastern Empire.

It was in the reign of Emperor Valens, in the year 372, that the greatest menace to the White race, both Germans and Romans, since the beginning of recorded history suddenly appeared on the eastern horizon. From the depths of Central Asia a vast horde of brown-skinned, flat-nosed, slant-eyed little horsemen — fast, fierce, hardy, bloodthirsty, and apparently inexhaustible in numbers — came swarming across the steppe around the north end of the Caspian Sea. They were the Huns.

The first to feel their impact were the Alans, living south of the Don between the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea. The Hunnic horde utterly crushed the Alans, some of whose remnants retreated southward into the Caucasus Mountains, while others fled westward in confusion, seeking refuge among the Goths. In the Caucasus today traces of the Nordic Alans are found in the Ossetes, whose language is Indo-European and who are taller and lighter than the Caucasic-speaking peoples around them.

End of the Ostrogoths

Next the Huns fell upon the Ostrogoths and routed them. The aged Ostrogothic king, Hermanric, slew himself in despair, and his successor, Vitimer, was killed in a vain effort to hold back the Brown flood. The Ostrogothic kingdom disintegrated, and its people streamed westward in terror, with the Huns at their heels.

Athanaric, king of the Visigoths, posted himself at the Dniester with a large army, but the Huns crossed the river and defeated him, inflicting great slaughter on his army.

Thus, the Visigoths too were forced to retreat westward. Athanaric petitioned Valens for permission for his people to cross the Danube and settle in Roman lands to the south. Valens consented, but he attached very hard conditions, which the Goths, in their desperation, were forced to accept: they were required to surrender all their weapons and to give up their women and children as hostages to the Romans.

Oppression and Rebellion

The Goths crossed the Danube in 376 and settled in the Roman province of Lower Moesia, which corresponds roughly to modern Bulgaria. There the Romans took shameful advantage of them. Roman-Jewish merchants, in return for grain and other staples, took the hostage children of the Goths as slaves.

The Goths secretly rearmed themselves and rose up. For two years they waged a war of revenge, ravaging Thrace, Macedonia, and Thessaly. Finally, on August 9, 378, in the great battle of Hadrianople, the Gothic cavalry, commanded now by Fritigern, annihilated Valens’ infantry (most of whom were also Goths), and the emperor himself was killed. This was the worst defeat Rome had suffered since the Goths defeated and killed Decius 127 years earlier, and the battle decisively changed the conduct of future wars. Heretofore, Roman infantry tactics had been considered unbeatable, but Fritigern’s Goths had shown what heavy cavalry could do to infantry unprotected by its own cavalry.

The emperor of the eastern half of the Empire who succeeded Valens took a much more conciliatory stance toward the Goths, and they were confirmed in their possession of much of the territory south of the Danube which they had seized between 376 and 378. The Huns, meanwhile, had occupied Gothic Dacia (presentday Romania), as well as all the lands to the east.

Loss of a Homeland

The ancient homeland of the Nordic race was now in the hands of non-Whites. For more than four millennia wave after wave of White warriors had come out of the eastern steppe to conquer and colonize Europe: Achaeans, Dorians, Latins, Celts, Germans, Balts, Slavs, Cimmerians, Scythians, Sarmatians, and uncounted and unnamed peoples before all these. But the Sarmatians were the last; after the Huns drove them and the Goths out, no other White barbarians were to come riding out of the east.

For the next thousand years the eastern steppe which had been the breeding ground of the Nordic race became the invasion route into Europe for periodic waves of non-White hordes from Asia: Huns, Avars, Turks, Magyars, Mongols.

German vs. German

The Huns contented themselves, for the time being, with that portion of Europe between the Carpathians and the Danube, leaving the Romans and the Germans elsewhere to their own devices. Rome, a hollow shelf peopled largely by Levantines and ruled in effect by a gaggle of filthy-rich Middle Eastern moneylenders, speculators, and merchants, depended for her continued existence upon cleverness and money rather than real strength. Germans menaced her and Germans defended her, and the Romans concentrated their energies on playing German off against German.

The game succeeded in the Eastern Empire, more or less, but not in the Western Empire. A Frank, Arbogast, was the chief adviser — and effective master — of Western Emperor Eugenius in the year 394, having assassinated Eugenius’ predecessor. The emperor of the East, Theodosius, sent his Gothic army against Arbogast, and Arbogast called on his fellow Franks for support. The two German armies fought at Aquileia, near modern Venice, and the Goths defeated the Franks.

Alaric the Bold

Two of the leaders of Theodosius’ army were Alaric the Bold, a Gothic prince, and Stilicho, a Vandal. After the battle of Aquileia Stilicho, nominally subordinate to Theodosius, became the effective master of the Western Empire. Alaric was chosen king of the Visigoths by his tribe and decided to challenge Stilicho, but as long as Stilicho lived he was able to hold Alaric at bay.

The emasculated and Levantinized Romans, unable to face the Germans man to man, bitterly resented their German allies as much as they did their German enemies. This resentment, born of weakness and cowardice, finally got the better of the Romans in 408, and they conspired to have their protector, Stilicho, murdered. Then the Romans in all the Italian cities butchered the wives and children of their German allies — 60,000 of them.

This foolish and brutal move sent Stilicho’s German soldiers into Alaric’s arms, and Italy was then at the Goth’s mercy. Alaric’s army ravaged large areas of the peninsula for two years in revenge for the massacre of the German families. Alaric demanded a large ransom from the Romans and forced them to release some 40,000 German slaves.

Fall of Rome

Then, on the night of August 24, 410, Alaric’s Goths took Rome and sacked the city. This date marked, for all practical purposes, the end of the capital of the world. Rome had endured for 1,163 years and had ruled for a large portion of that time, but it would never again be a seat of power. For a few more decades the moribund Empire of the West issued its commands from the fortress city of Ravenna, 200 miles north of Rome, until the whole charade was finally ended in 476. The Empire of the East, on the other hand, would last another thousand years.

The Huns, meanwhile, had not long contented themselves with Dacia, but had begun expanding westward again, wreaking such havoc that whole nations uprooted themselves and fled as the Huns advanced. The Vandals, a German people closely related to the Goths; the Alans who had been driven westward from the Transcaucasian steppe; and the Suebians poured across the Rhine into Gaul in 406, setting still other German nations, such as the Franks, Burgundians, and Alamanni, into motion.

Conquest of Spain

In 409 the Vandals, Alans, and Suebians crossed the Pyrenees into the Iberian peninsula, which they carved up into realms for themselves. They were followed a half-dozen years later by the Visigoths, and a great deal of fratricide took place before it was decided which parts of the peninsula belonged to whom.

Most of the Goths eventually re-crossed the Pyrenees and settled, for the moment, in the Gallic province of Aquitania Secunda, while the Vandals sailed across the Strait of Gibraltar and conquered the Roman province of Africa. Under their very able ruler, Gaiseric, the Vandals consolidated their hold on northern Africa, established themselves as a major naval power, and became prosperous.

In June 455 Gaiseric’s Vandal navy carried an invasion force to Italy which occupied the city of Rome and systematically looted it of everything of value which could be carried away. Gaiseric repulsed repeated efforts against Africa by the Eastern Empire and died undefeated in 477 at a very old age.

Ultimately, however, Africa became the graveyard of the Vandal nation. In 534, having allowed their prosperity to soften them, the Vandals were defeated by an army from Constantinople. A century later their descendants in Africa were swept away by an Arab tide driven by Islamic zeal. Today occasional blue eyes and light hair among some of the more remote tribes of the Atlas Mountains of Morocco and Algeria are the only traces remaining in Africa of the Vandals.

Attila, King of the Huns

The Huns halted their westward push for more than 40 years while they consolidated their hold on all of central and eastern Europe, and on much of northern Europe as well. In 433 they gained a new king, whose name was Attila. In 445, when Attila established his new capital at Buda, in what is now Hungary, the empire of the Huns stretched from the Caspian Sea to the North Sea.

In 451 Attila began moving west again, with the intention of seizing Gaul and then the rest of the Western Empire. His army consisted not only of Huns but also of contingents from all the conquered peoples of Europe: Ostrogoths, Gepids, Rugians, Scirians, Heruls, Thuringians, and others, including Slavs.

One contingent was made up of Burgundians, half of whom the Huns had subjugated (and nearly annihilated) in 436. The struggle between the Burgundians and the Huns forms the background for the German heroic epic, the Nibelungenlied.

Scourge of God

Attila’s mixed army threw western Europe into a state of terror as it advanced. So great was the devastation wrought on the countryside that Attila was given the nickname “the Scourge of God,” and it was said that grass never again grew where his horse had trod.

Two armies, one commanded by Aetius, the last of the Western Empire’s Roman generals, and the other by Theodoric, King of the Visigoths, rode against Attila. Aetius and Theodoric united their armies south of the Loire, in central Gaul, and compelled Attila to withdraw to the north-east.

Attila carefully chose the spot to halt his horde and make his stand. It was in a vast, open, and nearly level expanse of ground in northeastern France between the Marne and the Seine, where his cavalry would have ideal conditions for maneuvering. The region was known as the Catalaunian Plains, after the Catalauni, a Celtic people. The name of Chalons (ancient Catalaunum), is most often associated with the battle which took place on the Catalaunian Plains, although the actual site is much closer to the city of Troyes.

White Victory

In a furious, day-long battle frightful losses were inflicted on both sides, but the Visigoths, Franks, free Burgundians, and Alans of Aetius and Theodoric had gained a decisive advantage over the Huns and their allies by nightfall. Attila retreated behind his wagons and in despair ordered a huge funeral pyre built for himself. He intended neither to be taken alive by his foes nor to have his corpse fall into their hands.

King Theodoric had fallen during the day’s fighting, and the command of the Visigothic army had passed to his son, Thorismund. The latter was eager to press his advantage and avenge his father’s death by annihilating the Hunnic horde.

The wily Roman Actius, however, putting the interests of his dying Empire first, persuaded Thorismund to allow Attila to withdraw his horde from Gaul. Aetius was afraid that if Thorismund completely destroyed the power of the Huns, then the Visigoths would again be a menace to the Empire; he preferred that the Huns and the Visigoths keep one another in check.

Battle of the Nedao

Attila and his army ravaged the countryside again, as they made their way back to Hungary. The following year they invaded northern Italy and razed the city of Aquileia to the ground; those of its inhabitants who were not killed fled into the nearby marshes, later to found the city of Venice.

But in 453 Attila died. The 60-year-old Hun burst a blood vessel during his wedding-night exertions, following his marriage to a blonde German maiden, Hildico (called Kriernhild in the Nibelungenlied). The Huns had already been stripped of their aura of invincibility by Theodoric, and the death of their leader diminished them still further in the eyes of their German vassals.

The latter, under the leadership of Ardaric the Gepid, rose up in 454. At the battle of the Nedao River in that year it was strictly German against Hun, and the Germans won a total victory, completely destroying the power of the Huns in Europe.

Slavic Opportunity

The vanquished Huns fled eastward, settling finally around the shores of the Sea of Azov in a vastly diminished realm. They left behind them only their name, in Hungary. Unfortunately, they also left some of their genes in those parts of Europe they had overrun. But in 80 years they had turned Europe upside down. Entire regions were depopulated, and the old status quo had vanished.

This provided an opportunity for the Slavs to expand, and they took advantage of it, as mentioned earlier. Unfortunately for them — and for our entire race — the area into which the Slavs expanded corresponded largely to the area invaded repeatedly in later centuries by Asiatic hordes from the east, and the Slavic peoples suffered grievously. We will examine these Asiatic invasions in later installments.

ILLUSTRATIONS

a) GOTHS ON THE MOVE: In the latter part of the second century A.D. the Goths began the massive migration from their home on the southern shore of the Baltic Sea back to the ancient Nordic homeland in the steppe between the Caspian Sea and the Black Sea. This migration led to confrontation between the Goths and the Romans and set the stage for the final conquest of the Western Empire by Germans.

SLAVS suffered conquest by the Goths in the second century, but the later upheaval in the Gotho-Roman order caused by the invasion of the Huns presented the opportunity for Slavic expansion. The Ostrogoths and Visigoths, along with the Vandals (German) and Alans (Sarmatian), were driven westward by the Huns. Iberia and southern Gaul provided new homes for the Visigoths and Alans, while the Vandals crossed from Iberia to Africa and seized the Roman province there.

HUNS RAID A VILLA IN GAUL, ca. 454. So fierce and rapacious were these Asiatic nomads who came swarming into Europe in the fifth century that they swept all before them, razing cities to the ground and depopulating the countryside. The Germans finally defeated them at the battle of the Catalaunian Fields in 454 and then drove them out of Europe a few years later.

During the turbulent and eventful fifth century the Germans largely completed their conquest of the West. In the early years of that century German tribesmen, who had been raiding the coast of Roman Britain for many years, began a permanent invasion of the southeastern portion of the island, a development which was eventually to lead to a Germanic Britain.

In 476 Odoacer, an Ostrogothic chieftain who had become a general of Rome’s armies, deposed the last Roman emperor and ruled in his own name as king of Italy. Meanwhile the Visigoths were expanding their holdings in Gaul and completing their conquest of Spain, except for the northwestern region already held by their Suebian cousins and an enclave in the Pyrenees occupied by a remnant of the aboriginal Mediterranean inhabitants of the peninsula, the Basques.

And throughout the latter part of the century the Franks, the Alemanni, and the Burgundians were consolidating their own holds on the former Roman province of Gaul, establishing new kingdoms and laying the basis for the new European civilization of the Middle Ages. Everywhere in the West the old, decaying civilization centered on the Mediterranean gave way to the vigorous White barbarians from the North.

Oriental Infection

But the Germans did not make their conquest of the Roman world without becoming infected by some of the diseases which flourished so unwholesomely in Rome during her last days. Foremost among these was an infection which the Romans themselves had caught during the first century, a consequence of their own conquest of the Levant. It had begun as an offshoot of Judaism, had established itself in Jerusalem and a few other spots in the eastern Mediterranean area, and had traveled to Rome with Jewish merchants and speculators, who had long found that city an attractive center of operations.

It eventually became known to the world as Christianity, but for more than two centuries it festered in the sewers and catacombs of Rome, along with dozens of other alien religious sects from the Levant; its first adherents were Rome’s slaves, a cosmopolitan lot from all the lands conquered by the Romans. It was a religion designed to appeal to slaves: blessed are the poor, the meek, the wretched, the despised, it told them, for you shall inherit the earth from the strong, the brave, the proud, and the mighty; there will be pie in the sky for all believers, and the rest will suffer eternal torment. It appealed directly to a sense of envy and resentment of the weak against the strong.

Lions vs. Christians

Because of this it was a subversive religion, of course, and the Roman authorities took measures to curb it. Unfortunately, however, they did not take sufficiently strong measures; the persecutions of the Christians were sporadic, depending upon the momentary civic zeal of individual emperors rather than upon any longrange national program to eliminate the menace. The new religion spread from the slaves to the freedmen, that motley conglomeration of Syrians, Egyptians, Jews, Armenians, and members of a dozen other nations who made up Rome’s mercantile, petty entrepreneur, and free worker class. It even began to catch on in some of Rome’s legions.

Christianity had a number of competitors during this period, which had also come to Rome from the conquered Orient, but the former had one decisive advantage over the others: its superior organization. From the beginning the Christians set up a tightly organized, highly centralized, hierarchical structure which eminently suited their needs. The occasional periods of persecution served to keep them on their toes and to pull their organizational structure even more tightly together.

Edict of Milan

By the end of the third century Christianity had become the most popular as well as the most militant of the Oriental sects flourishing among the largely non-Roman inhabitants of the decaying Roman Empire. Even as late as the first years of the fourth century, under Emperor Diocletian, the Roman government was still making efforts to keep the Christians under control, but in 313 a new emperor, Constantine, decided that, if you can’t lick ’em, join ’em, and he issued an imperial edict legitimizing Christianity.

Although one of Constantine’s successors, Julian, attempted to reverse the continuing Christianization of the Roman Empire a few years later, it was already too late: the Goths, who made up the bulk of Rome’s armies by this time, had caught the infection from one of their own slaves, a Christian captive whom they called Wulfila. Wulfila was a tireless and effective missionary, and the Goths were an uprooted and unsettled people, among whom the new religion took hold easily. Wulfila’s translation of the Bible into Gothic greatly speeded up the process.

Conversion of the Franks

Before the end of the fourth century Christianity had also spread to the Vandals, Burgundians, Lombards, Gepids, and several other German tribes. A little over a century later the powerful nation of the Franks was converted. By the beginning of the second quarter of the sixth century, the only non-Christian Whites left were the Bavarians, Thuringians, Saxons, Frisians, Danes, Swedes, and Norse among the Germans — and virtually all the Balts and Slavs.

One can only understand the rapid spread of Christianity during the fourth and fifth centuries by realizing that, for all practical purposes, it had no opposition. That is, there was no other organized, militant, proselytizing church competing effectively with the Christian church.

Athanaric the Goth

The Christians had many individual opponents, of course: among the Romans several of the more responsible and civic-minded emperors, such as Diocletian, as well as what was left of the tradition-minded aristocracy; and among the Germans many farsighted leaders who resisted the imposition of an alien creed on their people and the abandonment of their ancient traditions. Athanaric, the great Gothic chieftain who led his people across the Danube in 376 to save them from the invading Huns, was notable in this regard.

Athanaric and the other traditionalists failed to halt the spread of Christianity, because they were only individuals. Although there were pagan priests, the traditional German religion never really had a church associated with it. It consisted in a body of beliefs, tales, and practices passed from generation to generation, but it had no centralized organization like Christianity.

Folk-religion

German religion was a folk-religion, which grew organically out of the people and out of the land they occupied. The boundary between a tribe’s most ancient historical legends and its religious myths, between its long-dead heroes and chieftains and its gods, was blurred at best. Because German religion belonged to the people and the land, it was not a proselytizing religion; the German attitude was that other peoples and races likewise had their own folk-religions, and it would be unnatural to impose one race’s religion on another race.

And because German religion was rooted in the land as well as in the people, it lost some of its viability when the people were uprooted from their land. It is no coincidence that the conversions of the Goths, Vandals, Burgundians, Lombards, Franks, and many other German tribes took place during the Voelkerwanderung, a period of strife, disorientation, and misery for many of those involved: a period when whole nations lost not only their ancient homelands but also their very identities.

Fire and Sword

After the Voelkerwanderung ended in the sixth century, the Christianization of the remaining pagan peoples of Europe proceeded much more slowly — and generally by fire and sword rather than by peaceful missionary effort. Whereas the Franks had become Christians more or less painlessly when their king Clovis (Chlodweg) converted for political reasons at the end of the fifth century, it was another 300 years before the Frankish king Charlemagne (Karl the Great) was able to bring about the conversion of his Saxon neighbors, and he accomplished that only by butchering half of them in a series of genocidal wars.

Early Christianity, in contrast to German religion, was as utterly intolerant as the Judaism from which it sprang. Even Roman religion, which, as an official state religion, equated religious observance with patriotism, tolerated the existence of other sects, so long as they did not threaten the state. But the early Christians were inspired by a fanatical hatred of all opposing creeds.

Also in contrast to German and Roman religion, Christianity, despite its specifically Jewish roots, claimed to be a universal (i.e., “catholic”) creed, equally applicable to Germans, Romans, Jews, Huns, and Negroes.

“Every place … shall be yours.”

The Christians took the Jewish tribal god Yahweh, or Jehovah, and universalized him. Originally he seems to have been a deity associated with one of the dormant volcanoes of the Arabian peninsula, a god so distinctly Semitic that he had a binding business contract (“covenant”) with his followers: if the Jews would remain faithful and obedient to him, he would deliver all the wealth of the non-Jewish peoples of the world into their hands. Observant Jews even today remind themselves of this by fastening mezuzoth to the door frames of their homes, wherein the verses from their Torah spelling out the Jews’ side of their larcenous deal with Yahweh are inscribed (Deuteronomy 6:4-9, 11:13-21; Yahweh’s reciprocal obligations are in the verses immediately following).

Nevertheless, the early Christian church, armed with an effective organization and a proselytizing fervor, and armored with a supreme contempt for everything non-Christian, was able to supplant Jupiter and Wotan alike with Yahweh.

The Germans, however, recreated the Semitic Yahweh in the image of their own Wotan, even as they accepted the new faith. The entire Christian ritual and doctrine, in fact, were to a large extent “Aryanized” by the Germans to suit their own inner nature and lifestyle. They played down the slave-religion aspects of Christianity (“the meek shall inherit the earth”) and emphasized the aspects which appealed to them (“I come bearing not peace, but a sword”). The incoherence and the multitude of internal inconsistencies of the doctrine made this sort of eclecticism easy.

Yule, Easter, Harvest Festival

In general, the Germans accepted without difficulty the Christian rituals — especially those which, like Christmas, Easter, and Thanksgiving were deliberately redesigned to correspond to pagan rituals and festivals of long standing — and the myths (parthenogenesis, turning water into wine, curing the blind, resurrection from the dead, etc.), and they ignored the ethics (turn the other cheek, all men are brothers, etc.).

A Frank of the seventh or eighth century would tremble in superstitious awe before some fragment of bone or vial of dried blood which the Church had declared a sacred relic with miracle-working powers — but if you smote him on the cheek you would have a fight on your hands, not another cheek turned.

As for the brotherhood of man and equality in the eyes of the Lord, the Germans had no time for such nonsense; when confronted with non-Whites, they instinctively reached for the nearest lethal weapon. They made mincemeat out of the Avars, who were cousins to the Huns, in the seventh century, and the Christianized Franks or Goths of that era would know exactly what to do with a few hundred thousand rioting American Blacks; they would, in fact, positively relish the opportunity to do what needed doing.

It could not have been expected to be otherwise. In the first place, a totally alien religion cannot be imposed on a spiritually healthy people — and the Germans were still essentially healthy, despite the dislocations caused by the Voelkerwanderung. Christianity had to be modified to suit their nature — at least, temporarily. In the second place, the average German did not have to come to grips with the alien moral imperatives of the Sermon on the Mount. All he had to do was learn when to genuflect; wrestling with Holy Writ was exclusively the problem of the clergy.

It was not until the Reformation, in the sixteenth century, that the laity began studying the Bible and thinking seriously about its contents. Even then, however, the tendency was to interpret alien teachings in a way that left them more or less compatible with natural tendencies.

Slave Morality

But Christian ethics — the slave morality preached in the Roman catacombs — was like a time bomb ticking away in Europe — a Trojan horse brought inside the fortress, waiting for its season. That season came, and the damage was done. Today Christianity is one of the most active forces working from within to destroy the White race.

From the Christian churches came the notion of “the White man’s burden,” along with the missionaries who saw in every African cannibal or Chinese coolie a soul to be saved, of equal value in the eyes of Jehovah to any White soul. It is entirely a Christian impulse — at least, on the part of the average American voter, if not the government — which sends American food and medical supplies to keep alive swarming millions of Asiatics, Africans, and Latins every time they have a famine, so that they can continue to outbreed Whites.

The otherworldly emphasis on individual salvation, on an individual relationship between Creator and creature which relegates the relationship between individual and race, tribe, and community to insignificance; the doctrine of human irresponsibility (“be, therefore, not anxious about tomorrow,” for the Lord will provide); the inversion of natural values inherent in the exalting of the botched, the unclean, and the poor in spirit in the Sermon on the Mount. — the injunction to “resist not evil” — all are prescriptions for racial suicide. Indeed, had a fiendishly clever enemy set out to concoct a set of doctrines intended to lead the White race to its destruction, he could hardly have done better.

The “White guilt” syndrome exploited so assiduously by America’s non-White minorities is a product of Christian teachings, as is the perverse reverence for “God’s chosen people” which has paralyzed so many Christians’ wills to resist Jewish depredations.

Moses Replaces Hermann

Not the least of the damage done by the Christianization of Europe was the gradual replacement of White tradition, legend, and imagery by that of the Jews. Instead of specifically Celtic or German or Slavic heroes, the Church’s saints, many of them Levantines, were held up to the young for emulation; instead of the feats of Hermann or Vercingetorix, children were taught of the doings of Moses and David. Europeans’ artistic inspiration was turned away from the depiction of their own rich heritage and used to glorify that of an alien race; Semitic proverbs and figures of speech took precedence over those of Indo-European provenance; Europeans even abandoned the names of their ancestors and began giving Jewish names to their children: Samuel and Sarah, John and Joan, Michael and Mary, Daniel and Deborah.

Despite all these long-term consequences of Christianity, however, the immediate symptoms of the infection which the conquering Germans picked up from the defeated Romans were hardly noticeable; White morals and manners, motivations and behavior remained much as they had been, for they were rooted in the genes — but now they had a new rationale.

Today’s Christian Patriots

And it is only fair to note that even today a fairly substantial minority of White men and women who still think of themselves as Christians have not allowed their sounder instincts to be corrupted by doctrines suited to a following of mongrelized slaves. They ignore the Jewish origins of Christianity and justify their instinctive dislike and distrust of Jews with the fact that the Jews, in demanding that Jesus be killed, became a race forever accursed (“His blood be on us and on our children”).

They interpret the divine injunction of brotherhood as applying only to Whites. Like the Franks of the Middle Ages, they believe what suits them and conveniently forget or invent their own interpretation for the rest. Were they the Christian mainstream today, the religion would not be the racial menace that it is. Unfortunately, however, they are not; virtually none are actively affiliated with any of the larger, established Christian churches.

Roman Britain

Let us return now to a development mentioned briefly at the beginning of this installment: the German conquest of Britain. Since the first century Britain had been part of the Roman Empire. By the last quarter of that century the Roman conquest of what is now England and Wales was essentially complete. The Celts who would not submit to the Romans had been pushed into Scotland or into Cornwall, neither of which was pacified or permanently occupied by the Romans.

In 123, during the reign of Emperor Hadrian, the Romans built a wall across northern Britain between Solway Firth and the mouth of the Tyne, 70 miles long, and stationed an army nearby to keep the marauding Scots and Picts out of England. (The Picts, or Picti, were Celts native to Scotland — called Caledonia by the Romans. The Scots, or Scotti, were actually Celts who sailed over from Ireland, although they often landed in Caledonia and then raided overland into Roman territory. Later many Scots settled permanently in Caledonia and gave their name to the territory.) A few years later another wall was erected about 80 miles north of Hadrian’s Wall, between the Firth of Clyde and the Firth of Forth, adding southern Scotland to the area claimed by the Romans, but they were never able to make this later claim stick.

Aside from sporadic raids by unsubdued Celts from Scotland and Ireland — and, later, by Germans from the Continent — Celtic Britain under Roman rule was relatively peaceful and prosperous. Agriculture, as everywhere else in the Empire, was the basic industry, but Britain was also an important exporter of lead, tin, and copper. Although the Romans expanded British mining considerably and improved it technologically, they made little impact on agricultural methods, except that three centuries of Roman-enforced peace and the excellent network of roads developed by the Romans undoubtedly increased the agricultural output of the island substantially.

St. Patrick

By the middle of the third century Christian missionaries were already at work among the conquered Celts of Britain, and by the end of the fourth century the entire area under Roman rule had been converted. From Roman Britain Christianity spread in the fifth century to Ireland, which was never occupied by Rome. The semi-legendary St. Patrick (ca. 389-ca. 461), who is credited with converting all of the pagan Irish to Christianity, was a British Celt.

Throughout the fourth century Roman Britain was subjected to increasingly more frequent raids by Saxons and other non-Christian Germans, particularly along the southeastern coast, which accordingly was known as the Saxon Shore. In the year 367 a concerted attack by Saxons from the south and east, Picts from the north, and Irish Celts from the west shattered Britain’s Roman defenses and almost overran the island. The Roman count of the Saxon Shore was killed, Hadrian’s Wall was breached, and London was besieged. The Romans had to rush another army to Britain from the Continent, and it was three years before the island was again secured.

Spiritual and Economic Decay

Three processes, by no means independent of one another, were taking place simultaneously in Britain — and throughout the West — during the fourth century: the economic breakdown of the Empire; the Christianization of the population; and growing pressure from the unconverted and untamed Germans, who saw in the peaceful and still prosperous island, with its subdued and domesticated people, a rich prize for the taking. More and more the Saxon raiders began to think in terms of seizing and holding land, rather than merely plundering the coast and then sailing back to the Continent.

The economy of the Roman Empire was a slave economy; it sustained itself to a large extent through slave labor and tribute exacted from conquered peoples. As long as the Empire was still expanding — still winning new slaves and booty — the economy was strong enough to tolerate many mistakes and abuses. But when, in the second century, imperial expansion bogged down and then ground to a halt, the economy faltered. It was no coincidence that abuses, instead of being reined in at this time to give the economy a chance, were exacerbated: the expensive and tax-hungry bureaucracy multiplied, while official corruption grew apace. Racial decadence was taking its toll in all spheres of Roman life: civic, military, economic, and spiritual.

Rome Cuts Its Losses

Beset on all fronts and pressed for sufficient manpower for its armies — as well as the means to pay them — Rome found the continued defense of its far-flung colonial possessions an increasingly expensive and less-profitable proposition. Britain was the farthest flung of all, and early in the fifth century the Germans forced the issue.

Obliged to withdraw troops from Britain in the first decade of the fifth century in order to meet the threat posed to Italy by Alaric’s Gothic army, the Romans left Britain ill-prepared to deal with stepped-up German assaults. In the winter of 406 a horde of Germans from several tribes, as well as a large contingent of Sarmatian Alans driven from their eastern homeland by the Huns, crossed the frozen Rhine into Gaul, effectively cutting the lines of communication between Britain and Rome.

Alaric’s sack of Rome four years later marked the end of all Roman claim to Britain. In 410 Emperor Honorius sent word to the civil authorities in Britain, telling them that henceforth they were on their own; Rome could no longer give them any assistance.

Fighting Fire with Fire

About 15 years later, around 425, a Roman-British aristocrat, Vortigern, became leader of the British. Beset by continued Scottish and Pictish raids, which were even more troublesome at the moment than the Saxon raids from the Continent, Vortigern made the fateful decision to fight fire with fire: he invited a group of Germans, led by a chieftain of the Jutes named Hengist, to settle in Britain, offering them land in what is now Kent, in the southeastern corner of the island, in return for their help in defending Britain from pagan Celtic raiders. The Germans accepted the offer, and then they invited their friends to come as well. Vortigern ended up with a lot more Germans than he had counted on, and around the year 442 they rose against him and after a struggle of some ten years: defeated him.

A British Christian monk, Gildas, who detested the pagan Germans, describing these events a century later condemned his fellow Britons for their folly:

“To hold back the northern peoples, they introduced into the island the vile, unspeakable Saxons, hated of God and man alike…. Nothing more frightful had ever happened to this island, nothing more bitter…. What raw, hopeless stupidity! Of their own free will they invited in under the same roof the enemy they feared worse than death…. So the brood of cubs burst forth from the lair of the barbarian lioness, in three ‘keels,’ as they call warships in their language….

“All the greater towns fell to the enemy’s battering rams; all their inhabitants, bishops, priests, and people, were mown down together, while swords flashed and flames crackled…. Some of the wretched survivors were caught in the hills and slaughtered in heaps; others surrendered themselves to perpetual slavery in enemy hands …; others emigrated overseas…. Others entrusted their lives … to the rugged hills, the thick forests and the cliffs of the sea….”

English Origins

For the next half century bands of Germans continued to sail over from the Continent, and most of them stayed to settle in the lands which they easily wrested from the Christianized Britons, who were thoroughly demoralized after Hengist’s victory over Vortigern. The English historian Bede (673-735), in his classic statement on the origins of the English people, wrote: “The race of the English, or Saxons (Anglorum sive Saxonum gens), came from three very strong tribes of Germany, that is, from the Saxons, the Angles, and the Jutes.”

Actually, several other tribes were represented as well: namely, Franks, Frisians, and Suebians. All of these immigrants came from the area of Germany between Jutland (Denmark) and the lower Rhine, centered on the lower Elbe, and they had already amalgamated on the Continent to the extent that they formed a reasonably homogeneous cultural-ethnic group by the middle of the fifth century. Thus, it is not especially significant that the name “Saxon” is most commonly used in referring to all of the fifth-century immigrants as a group, while it was the Angles who eventually gave their name to the newly conquered land (England, or “Angle-land”). Later the people and their culture came to be known as “Anglo-Saxon.”

King Arthur

Toward the end of the fifth century British resistance seems to have stiffened a bit, and the Germans apparently suffered a major setback in their progressive takeover of the island by losing a battle against their Celtic opponents at Mount Badon, around the year 500. British tradition associates the name of Arthur, a Celtic king, with this period. King Arthur, as the leader of the British resistance movement against the Saxons, is the subject of a great mass of colorful legend, but very little of it can be accepted as actually historical.

In any event, by the middle of the sixth century the invaders had regained the initiative, and there was no holding them back. The Germans (that is, the English) pushed the Celts (that is, the British) into the remoteness of Cornwall and Wales (welsch being the name the Germans applied to all their Romanized neighbors) or off the island altogether. Many Britons in this latter category settled in Gaul, in the peninsula which came to be called Brittany as a consequence.

So thorough was the Saxons’ conquest of Britain that the Romano-Celtic culture of their predecessors was virtually wiped out; the language, the religion, the art, and the lifestyle all became German. By the year 600 Anglo-Saxon Britain had been organized into seven or eight major kingdoms and a number of minor ones. Already, however, it was customary for a single king, designated the bretwaida (Britainwielder, Britain-ruler), to have primacy. At the beginning of the seventh century it was the king of Kent who had primacy.

Neighboring kingdoms were named according to the German tribal groups which had settled there and their relative geographical ordering: in Wessex, Essex, Sussex, and Middlesex lived the western, eastern, southern, and middle Saxons respectively. East Anglia, settled by Angles, was divided into two sections, Norfolk and Suffolk, occupied by the North Folk (northern Angles) and the South Folk (southern Angles). Christianity was relegated to the so-called “Celtic fringe”: Wales, Cornwall, southwestern Scotland, and Ireland.

After a century and a half Celtic Christian missionaries finally found it safe to ply their trade in Anglo-Saxon England; about the same time Pope Gregory I dispatched a batch of missionaries to England from Rome, and a gradual process of conversion began. Often the key to conversion was to offer a Christian wife from a royal family on the Continent to a Saxon king. Such was the case with the first royal Anglo-Saxon convert, King Ethelbert of Kent. His Frankish Christian wife Bertha prevailed upon him to welcome the Pope’s missionaries, and in 597 he yielded to her pleadings and was baptized. The following century saw the conversion of most of the English.

Vikings and Normans

This is not a political history, and so we will not concern ourselves to a great extent with subsequent events in Britain, except to note the ninth-century conquest of most of England (and part of Ireland) by Vikings from Norway and Denmark — the topic of a later installment dealing also with other Viking conquests — and the 11th-century conquest by Normans. Both these conquests brought new waves of immigrants, but they were substantially German (the Vikings, were purely German, while the Normans, though originally Vikings themselves, had spent 150 years in France and absorbed a great deal of Latin culture) and tended to reinforce the Anglo-Saxon racial element already in Britain.

Britain’s Population

Prior to the racial chaos unleashed in Britain following the Second World War, then, we have the following successive racial elements going into the makeup of the population of Britain: First, during the Ice Age, were the Upper Paleolithic big-game hunters, the Cro-Magnon race, who roamed the tundra of southern Britain, which remained unglaciated, and crossed freely between Britain and the Continent over dry land.

Second, during the Neolithic, came a Mediterranean element from the south.

Third were the Nordic Indo-Europeans, who began arriving in Britain before 2,000 B.C. In the fifth century B.C. the first wave of these Indo-Europeans who were clearly Celts arrived, and they became the dominant racial and cultural element in Britain and Ireland for the next millennium. Fourth came the Romans, in the first century A.D. Three Roman armies, totaling about 100,000 men, were stationed in Britain (at York, Chester, and Carlisle), and for nearly 300 years these men took Celtic wives or girlfriends. Many of them settled in Britain, in coloniae, after their terms of service. In the third and fourth centuries these Roman occupation armies were heavily German, but in the first and second centuries they came mostly from Italy and introduced, therefore, some additional Mediterranean blood into the British population.

Finally, in the fifth century A.D. came the first wave of German invaders — the Anglo-Saxons — followed by two further Germanic waves, the Vikings and the Normans.

ILLUSTRATIONS

a) FIFTH CENTURY German boat, of the type the Jutish chieftain Hengist and his men must have used. This is an artist’s reconstruction of a 70-foot, clinker-built wooden boat, propelled by 30 oarsmen, which has been excavated from a bog at Nydam, in southern Jutland.

b) CONTINENTAL HOMELAND of the English: The German tribesmen who conquered Roman Britain came from this stretch of coastland along the North Sea.

c) SAXONS stormed and took one British town after another during the latter part of the sixth century.

d) HADRIAN’S WALL, built in 123 to keep Scottish and Pictish raiders out of Roman Britain, runs for 70 miles across northern England.

e) THE SEVEN PRINCIPAL Anglo-Saxon kingdoms at the beginning of the seventh century — the so-called Heptarchy — were Wessex, Sussex, Essex, Kent, East Anglia, Mercia, and Northumbria. Although Kent, whose dynasty was founded by Hengist, initially was the most prominent, primacy passed to other kingdoms as time passed. Wessex, under Alfred the Great, who unified England in the latter part of the ninth century, was the last surviving kingdom of the Heptarchy.

f) FRANK’S CASKET, so-called, is a small chest of carved whalebone, believed to be made in Northumbria in the latter part of the seventh century — a time when the conversion of the English to Christianity was still underway. The carvings on the various panels of the chest combine ancient runes and scenes from Germanic mythology with scenes from Christian mythology.

Plus one unlabeled drawing.

Just as the southeastern-most region of Europe — the lands bordering the Black Sea on the west and north — has been a borderland contested between Whites and non-Whites over the course of most of our recorded history, so also has Europe’s southwesternmost projection, the Iberian peninsula, been a racial battlefield throughout the centuries. Serving as a natural gateway into Europe from Africa, Iberia has repeatedly been used by invaders from the south, and the racial consequences may be seen in Spain and Portugal today, where an exceptionally wide range of racial types is to be found.

Despite today’s diversity, Iberia seems to have shared a common racial heritage with the lands north of the Pyrenees during the Ice Ages, when men and women of the Cro-Magnon race hunted there and left in Spanish caves some of the most magnificent specimens of their art (see the third instalment in this series). With the retreat of the glaciers and the thawing of the tundra, however, a short (and, presumably, dark) Mediterranean type entered the peninsula from northen Africa and became established there, about the same time as in Italy and Greece, around 8,000 years ago. ago.

Bell Beaker Folk

During the Neolithic, as the climate north of the Pyrenees became suitable for agriculture, these Mediterranean Iberians began expanding into other areas of Europe, eventually reaching Britain and southern Germany. Archaeologists refer to one of the later waves of these people as the Bell Beaker folk. Remnants of these Iberian invaders were found in Britain as late as the first century A.D., and they are described by the Roman writer Tacitus in the portion of his Agricola dealing with British geography and ethnology: “The dark complexion of the Silures, their usually curly hair, and the fact that Spain is the opposite shore to them (not exactly; they were in southeastern Wales, quite far from Spain -Ed.), are evidence that Iberians of a former date crossed over and occupied these parts.” The Silures of Wales evidently resembled the Spaniards with whom Tacitus was familiar.

By Tacitus’ day Spain had seen much more than Cro-Magnons and Iberians, however. The Phoenicians, a Semitic people from the eastern Mediterranean, established colonies in Iberia in prehistoric times, prior to 1,000 B.C. They were drawn there by the considerable mineral wealth of the peninsula, which had active mines producing silver, gold, copper, lead, and iron well before the dawn of history. Cadiz, Malaga, and Cordoba were all established originally by the Phoenicians, and the name Spain itself is of Phoenician origin.

Greeks and Celts

As early as 600 B.C. the Greeks had also established colonies in Iberia, mainly on the coast of northern Catalonia (the northeastern part of the peninsula), for the same reason as the Phoenicians. The Greeks later expanded southward along the Catalonian coast and down into Valencia.

Around 500 B.C. the first Celts arrived. Moving southward and westward, they crossed the Pyrenees and settled primarily in the west and northwest of the peninsula. Later groups of Celts pushed on into the other parts of the peninsula, overcame the Iberian natives, and intermarried with them, yielding the Celtiberian race.

Subsequently many Celtiberians migrated northward and occupied that portion of Gaul south of the Garonne River ancient Acuitania modern Gascony), where new Celtic bands pushed through them on their way south. Only in the northwestern part of Iberia, in Galicia and Asturias, did the Celts remain relatively unmixed.

Restless Basques

Iberia’s varied topography has always helped to maintain the diversity of her population . In particular, the mountains of the peninsula have served as refuges for the more independent-minded of her peoples — and there has always been an extraordinary abundance of the latter in Iberia. Even today, several separatist movements keep Spain in a state of political unrest. The most notable of these is that of the Basques, a remnant of the original Iberian race. The Basques have undoubtedly undergone a certain amount of racial admixture with Indo-Europeans over the last 2,500 years, but their speech remains as the sole example of a Mediterranean language still extant on western European soil.

In 480 B.C. the Carthaginians, a Semitic people of Phoenician origin, in response to a plea for help from their Phoenician cousins in Cadiz who were attempting to put down an Iberian insurrection, invaded the peninsula. Once in, the Carthaginians decided to stay and they settled down to a long period of expansion and economic exploitation.

Semitic Beachhead

In 237 B.C., after the First Punic War, in which Rome took Sicily away from Carthage, the Carthaginians made the fateful decision to strengthen their beachhead on European soil. They began a general conquest and colonization of those parts of Iberia not already under their control. During this process the Carthaginian general Hamilcar Barca founded the cities of Cartagena and Barcelona, the latter named for his own family.

Rome regarded the Carthaginian moves in Iberia — in particular, the siege of the Greek colony of Saguntum (modern Sagunto, on the Valencian coast) — as a casus belli; thus commenced the Second Punic War. After a long and difficult struggle against the redoubtable Hannibal, Rome crushed Carthage and found herself in possession of a new province: Iberia. Although it then took the Romans 75 years to pacify all the Iberians, Celts, and Celtiberians of the peninsula, it remained Roman for more than five centuries. The Roman imprint on Spanish culture and politics, as well as on the racial destiny of the peninsula was very strong.

The Roman conquest ended the power of the Semitic Carthaginians in Iberia, but on the heels of Rome’s legions came another plague of Semites to batten on the rich province: the Jews. In their inimitable fashion they wormed their way into every aspect of the Iberian economy, and it was not long before there was hardly a commercial transaction anywhere in the peninsula in which money did not rub off on some Jew’s palm.

So many Jews flocked to Roman Spain, and they multiplied so prodigiously there, that today the Jews of the world still divide themselves into two categories: those descended from the Jews of the Iberian peninsula, who are called Sephardim, and those descended from the Jews who battened on central and eastern Europe instead, who are called Ashkenazim. Spain was for the Jews like New York and Miami Beach rolled into one: a commercial center with great natural resources where they could become filthy rich, and a place in the sun where they could then sit on their accumulated shekels in leisure and comfort.

Germans and Alans

Roman authority and Jewish wealth coexisted more or less amicably in Spain for 500 years. By the beginning of the fifth century A.D., however, the Romans were as decadent in Spain as in Italy, and German and Sarmatian invaders from the north found the rich province easy picking. As described in the l7th installment in this series, the Alans, Vandals, and Suebians crossed the Pyrenees into Spain in 409 and divided the peninsula among themselves, after first laying waste to it.

They were followed shortly by the Visigoths, under Adolf, brother-in-law and successor of the mighty Alaric, following the latter’s sack of Rome. The Visigoths subjected their predecessors, nearly annihilating the Alans in the process, and established their ownership not only of the peninsula but also of a substantial portion of southwestern Gaul as well. After the Suebians and Vandals had been pacified, they were allowed to remain in the northwestern corner of the peninsula (Galicia), while the Visigoths settled north of the Pyrenees, making Toulouse their capital.

Andalusia

The Vandals did not long remain pacified, however; war soon broke out between them and the Suebians, and the former left Galicia and reestablished themselves in the southern part of the peninsula, to which they gave their name: (V)andalusia. Then, in March 429, the entire nation, 80,000 strong, crossed the Strait of Gibraltar and seized new territory in northern Africa (see the l7th installment).

The Suebians seized the land vacated by the Vandals, but the Goths eventually reasserted their own dominion and pushed the former back into Galicia and adjacent territory in the northwest. The leader of the Goths at this time was Euric, a son of the mighty Theodoric, vanquisher of Attila.

Euric may be considered the founder of the Gothic Kingdom of Spain. He died in 484. His successors, Visigoths and Ostrogoths, ruled the peninsula for the next 227 years.

Jews vs. Goths

By the time of Recared I, who reigned from 585 to 601, Gothic Spain was again renowned for its wealth — and again the Jews found that wealth irresistible. The Goths, however, were not so willing as the Romans had been to allow the Jews to eat up the whole country, and in consequence there was almost continual strife between Goths and Jews, with the latter incessantly scheming, agitating, and whining of “persecution.”

Much to their later regret, the Goths did not deal decisively with their Jewish problem. Instead, they allowed themselves to be convinced by their bishops that a sprinkling of holy water would cure the Jews of their ancestral ways. King Sisibert, around the year 620, forced 80,000 Jews to be baptized, and an even larger number were driven from the kingdom.

Half a century later one of his successors, Wamba, was obliged to take similar measures against the Jews, so troublesome had they again become. In 673 he expelled from the Gothic realm all who would not submit to baptism, while the citizens of several Spanish communities acted on their own initiative and dealt with local Jewish merchants and moneylenders in a more forceful and effective way.

Decadence and Racemixing

Although King Wamba was a strong ruler, who successfully put down a Basque rebellion and maintained his frontiers against his Frankish neighbors to the north and Arab pirates raiding by sea from the south, prosperity had already begun taking its toll of Gothic vigor. It was Wamba’s immediate predecessor, Recesuinto, who, at the insistence of the Church, took the first direct step toward Gothic racial suicide (if we do not count as such Sisibert’s allowing baptized Jews to pass as Gentiles a few years earlier) when he abolished the longstanding ban against intermarriage.

Prior to Recesuinto’s reign, the racial pride of the Goths had remained intact. None but Goths might rule, and Goths might marry none but Goths. The penalty for violation of this ban was quite severe: both partners were burned at the stake. Thus, the blood of the Goths had remained unmixed with that of their Roman, Iberian, and Jewish subjects. Recesuinto allowed Goths to marry baptized Jews and anyone else who claimed Christian beliefs, and the nobility of Spain has since been tainted heavily with the Semitic blood of department-store heiresses, or the equivalent thereof in that pre-department-store era.

The Jews conspired all the more against the Goths, and the successors of Recesuinto and Wamba were obliged to take measures against them on a number of occasions. They failed, however, to rid their kingdom of the pestilence, because they did not apply the same measures against baptized Jews as against their unbaptized brethren. This shortsightedness finally led to the undoing of the Goths during the reign of Roderic, who took the throne in 709.

While the men of Roderic’s race had grown soft and indecisive over the course of the dozen generations which had passed since the time of Adolf, unable finally even to cope with a gaggle of money-hungry Semites in their midst, a new Semitic danger had begun to rise to the south of them.

Rise of Islam

About the month of August of the year 570, five years after the death of Emperor Justinian and certainly within a few years of the birth of Pepin of Landen, also known as Pepin the Old, Count of Austrasia, Mayor of the Palace, and great-grandfather of Charles Martel — there was born in the Arabian city of Mecca a son to the merchant Abdallah, son of Abdul-Muttalib, son of Hashim. He was named Muhammad.

At about the age of 25 Muhammad wooed and won a wealthy widow, 15 years his senior. Her fortune enabled him to spend less time buying and selling camels and more time reflecting on the sad state of morals among his fellow Arabs.

God of the Black Stone

When he reached the age of 40 Muhammad decided to leave the family business altogether and put himself forth as a prophet. He began preaching a creed which was an amalgam of several of the Semitic religions of his day: a bit of Judaism, a bit of Christianity, and a bit of the traditional Arab religion then holding sway in Mecca. Muhammad emphasized two things: that Allah, the local Arab god of the Black Stone of the Kaaba, was the only god; and that charity, in the form of almsgiving, was necessary to virtue. (At the time the Arabs had a number of deities, although Allah was generally considered supreme. The Black Stone associated with this particular god, perhaps a meteorite, had been worshipped by Arabs since prehistoric times. It is now built into one of the walls of the Kaaba, a small temple in Mecca which, in Muhammad’s day, also housed the embodiments of a number of other gods.)

The prophet business went no better for Muhammad than the camel business at first, but he was nothing if not persistent. When his fellow Meccans threatened his life, he fled with some 70 followers to Medina, 200 miles to the north. That was in 622, the year from which Muslims date their subsequent history.

Needless to say, Muhammad’s following increased after 622, and by the time of his death ten years later he had united most of Arabia behind him and convinced his countrymen of their sacred obligation to spread his new creed among the infidels, using fire and sword. Incited by his teachings, the Arabs began a campaign of foreign conquest and forced conversion in the Middle East and northern Africa. By the time Roderic ascended the throne of the Goths in 709, Muslim hordes had conquered Persia, Mesopotamia, Syria, Palestine, the easternmost regions of Asia Minor, Egypt, and all the rest of northern Africa except the Gothic fortress of Ceuta, on the African side of the Strait of Gibraltar.

Fall of Spain

Treason delivered Ceuta into the hands of the Arabs and their allies in 711, and an Arab-Moorish invasion force sailed across the strait and seized a beachhead in Andalusia. Roderic’s army fought the invaders in a fierce, three-day battle at Xeres (now Jerez de la Frontera), about 13 miles inland from Cadiz, under a blazing July sun. The Moors under their Berber general Tariq, won, and the Goths retreated to their cities.

The Gothic cities were well fortified and had withstood Arab raiding parties more than once, but as soon as Tariq’s dusky horde appeared outside the walls of each city in 711, the Jews inside, by prearrangement, threw open the gates.

Although Muhammad had experienced especially strong opposition from the Jews of Medina, who had controlled the business of that city during his stay there, and he had singled them out for special opprobrium in his writings (“Satan has gained possession of them and caused them to forget Allah’s warning. They are the confederates of Satan….” — Koran, chapter 58, verse 17), his followers had not hesitated to make a deal with their fellow Semites in order to vanquish the infidel Goths.

Jewish Hatred

For their part, the Jews were more than ready to trade masters. They had hopes, which were soon realized, that under Arab rule they would be able to regain the wealth, power, and privileged position they had held under the Romans. They bitterly hated the Goths for attempting to assimilate them into the Spanish population and make them work for their daily bread alongside Christian Spaniards.

Before word of the Jews’ treachery could be spread and the Goths could separate them — baptized and otherwise — from the general population and neutralize them, the invaders held virtually all the strong-points. Within a few months the greater part of Gothic Spain was in Muslim hands, and only scattered survivors made their way northward across the Pyrenees or into one of two remaining Gothic enclaves. One of these, in the southeast, fell to the Arabs a few years later. Only in the mountains of the north, in Asturias, were the Goths able to hold back the Semitic tide permanently.

Still Gloating

Even today, 12 centuries after the fact, Jews still gather in their synagogues on holidays to gloat over their destruction of the Goths, and Jewish writers openly boast of their treachery. The popular Jewish author and lecturer, Max I. Dimont, has taken particular satisfaction in the fate of the Gothic women, both in Spain and in those areas of Gaul subject to Moorish raiding parties from the south. In his best-selling book, The Indestructible Jews, Dimont writes: “As blond Christian maidens fetched fancy prices in the slave markets, raids in Christian lands by Muslim private entrepreneurs became big business. Female captives were pedigreed like dogs. Their Christian antecedents, their genuine blondness, their virginity, and their ability to bear children were all ascertained and notarized before they were marketed.”

Dimont discreetly avoids mentioning that the slave merchants doing the pedigreeing and marketing of these White girls were, in most cases, Jews. What he does say is: “From the inception of Islam’s conquest, Spanish Jews had soared to the highest government posts. A series of brilliant Jewish viziers — viceroys — enriched the caliphate’s coffers and helped usher in an age of splendor and learning.”

Battle of Tours

The victorious Semites and their mixed-race allies from north Africa did not long remain content with their conquests south of the Pyrenees. In 722 they invaded Gothic Gaul and seized Narbonne, Carcassonne, and several other towns. Ten years later, with an enormous army of Arabs and Moors behind him, the Arab governor of Spain, Abd ar-Rahman (whose name is spelled in various ways by different authors), began a new drive to the north, laying waste Gothic and Frankish areas of Gaul alike. His aim was to add all of Europe to the Muslim realm.

Eudes (also known as Odo), the Gothic count of Aquitaine, tried to hold back the invaders at the Garonne but failed. He then combined his remaining forces with an army of Franks and German volunteers from across the Rhine, under the leadership of Charles (Karl), count of the Austrasian Franks. The armies f Charles and Abd ar-Rahman met in the rolling champagne country of east-central France, between the towns of Tours and Poitiers, in October 732. The ensuing battle was one of the most momentous in the history of our race.

Indo-European over Semite

The English historian Edward Creasy speaks of “the great victory won by Charles Martel over the Saracens, A.D. 732, which gave a decisive check to the career of Arab conquest in Western Europe, rescued Christendom from Islam, preserved the relics of ancient and the germs of modern civilization, and reestablished the old superiority of the Indo-European over the Semitic family of mankind.”

The medieval chroniclers have described the conflict in picturesque terms:

“Then Abd ar-Rahman, seeing the land filled with the multitude of his army, pierces through the mountains, tramples over rough and level ground, plunders far into the country of the Franks, and smites all with the sword, insomuch that when Odo came to battle with him at the River Garonne, and fled before him, God alone knows the number of the slain. Then Abd ar-Rahman pursued after Count Odo, and, while he strives to spoil and burn the holy shrine at Tours, he encounters the chief of the Austrasian Franks, Charles, a man of war from his youth up, to whom Odo had sent warning. There for nearly seven days they strive intensely, and at last they set themselves in battle array, and the nations of the North standing firm as a wall and impenetrable as a zone of ice utterly slay the Arabs with the edge of the sword.”

Stout Hearts and Iron Hands

One medieval account reckons the Arab dead at 375,000, but this is probably an exaggeration. The great historian Edward Gibbon also draws on medieval sources in his description of the battle:

“No sooner had (Charles) collected his forces than he sought and found the enemy in the center of France, between Tours and Poitiers. His well-conducted march was covered by a range of hills, and Abderame appears to have been surprised by his unexpected presence. The nations of Asia, Africa, and Europe advanced with equal ardor to an encounter which would change the history of the world. In the six first days of desultory combat, the horsemen and archers of the East maintained their advantage: but in the closer onset of the seventh day the Orientals were oppressed by the strength and stature of the Germans, who, with stout hearts and iron hands, asserted the civil and religious freedom of their posterity. The epithet of Martel, the Hammer, which has been added to the name of Charles, is expressive of his weighty and irresistible strokes…. After a bloody field, in which Abderame was slain, the Saracens, in the close of the evening, retired to their camp. In the disorder and despair of the night, the various tribes of Yemen and Damascus, of Africa and Spain, were provoked to turn their arms against each other: the remains of their host were suddenly dissolved, and each emir consulted his safety by a hasty and separate retreat….

“The victory of the Franks was complete and final; Aquitaine was recovered by the arms of Eudes; the Arabs never resumed the conquest of Gaul, and they were soon driven beyond the Pyrenees by Charles Martel and his valiant race.”

Gibbon adds to his account the information that the Christian priests and bishops of France, instead of being grateful to Charles for saving them, cursed his memory because he had found it necessary to seize a portion of the Church’s ill-gotten wealth in order to pay his army:

“His merits were forgotten, his sacrilege alone was remembered, and, in an epistle to a Carlovingian prince; a Gallic synod presumes to declare that his ancestor was damned; that on the opening of his tomb the spectators were affrighted by a smell of fire and the aspect of a horrid dragon; and that a saint of the times was indulged with a pleasant vision of the soul and body of Charles Martel, burning, to all eternity, in the abyss of hell.”

One can only suspect that the clerics involved in this condemnation may have had among them a few of those baptized Jews who had been slipping into the Spanish church for decades, and who were the first to make their way to the safety of the north when their brethren threw open the gates of the Gothic cities to the invaders.

Though forced to retreat south of the Pyrenees, the Arabs and the other Muslim invaders of Spain remained in the peninsula for nearly 800 years, and the genetic damage they wrought there was great. Islam, like Christianity, makes no distinction of race; all that counts is religion, not blood. Thus, the interbreeding begun under Recesuinto to satisfy the demands of his bishops continued at an accelerated pace under Muslim rule, and, as mentioned by the Jewish writer Dimont, the Arabs and Moors were especially fond of mingling their genes with those of Spain’s blond Gothic nobility.

One indication of this lust is revealed by the terms imposed on the Goths who remained in the unconquered enclave in the northwest, which later grew into the Kingdom of Galicia: In order to keep the Semites at bay they were required to pay a tribute of 100 blond virgins each year. It was not until the reign of Alfonso 11, which began in 791, that the Goths were again strong enough to put an end to this humiliating imposition.

Song of Roland

The painfully slow reconquest of Spain began soon after Charles Martel’s great victory. In 755 the Franks retook Narbonne, after a siege of six years, and drove the last of the Arabs out of Gaul’s coastal strip of Septimania. Thereafter the Franks undertook repeated campaigns south of the Pyrenees.

In 778 Charlemagne (Karl the Great), Charles Martel’s grandson, retook most of the territory north of the Ebro. It was during the withdrawal of the Franks back across the Pyrenees after this successful campaign that the rearguard of Charlemagne’s army, commanded by his nephew Roland, was ambushed in a mountain pass near Roncesvalles by Basque tribesmen (who, it should be noted, opposed their Mediterranean cousins, the Arabs, with the same vigor with which they opposed Goths and Franks). This episode provided material for a number of heroic medieval romances, including the immortal Chanson de Roland of the 11th century.

After this the Arabs and Moors were gradually pushed back toward Africa in a series of bloody wars with their neighbors to the north. Not until 1492 was the reconquest of the peninsula finally completed. In that year the unbaptized Jews were expelled en masse from the country they had betrayed eight centuries earlier, and the remaining pockets of Moors followed them ten years later. The Inquisition, which had been established in 1478, dealt to a limited extent with the baptized Jews.

ILLUSTRATIONS

a) IN THE BATTLE OF TOURS, in 732, Charles the Hammer, great-grandson of Pepin of Landen and grandfather of Charlemagne, turned back the Moors from their intended conquest of Europe, thereby preserving the White race.

b) ROMAN AQUEDUCT at Segovia is a magnificent relic of Spain’s five centuries as a Roman province.

c) CHARLEMAGNE liberates the Spanish city of Pamplona, as depicted In a medieval sculpture.

d) ROLAND, commander of the rearguard of Charlemagne’s army, ambushed by Basques as it returns from an expedition against the Moors of Spain in 778, vainly sounds his mighty horn Olifant to summon aid.

Today the geographical boundary between Europe and Africa-Asia runs roughly from the Strait of Gibraltar eastward across the Mediterranean to the Aegean Sea, along the eastern and northern shores of the Black Sea, thence along the spine of the Caucasus range to the Caspian Sea, and northward along the Urals to the Arctic Ocean. Somewhat more roughly a racial boundary follows the same course, dividing Whites to the north and west from non-Whites to the south and east.

Throughout history the borderlands on either side of this boundary have been contested between White and non-White, between European and Asian, and the contest has been fiercer, bloodier, crueler, and more unrelenting than any of the wars Europeans have fought among themselves. This is as it should be, considering the vastly greater stakes: when European fought European, the outcome determined which sovereign taxes would be paid to or the language one’s descendants would speak, but when European fought Asian the issue was whether or not one’s descendants would be White.

Three-phase Struggle

The contest actually began long before the dawn of history, nearly 10,000 years ago, when the Mediterraneans of northern Africa and the Middle East began infiltrating Europe during the Neolithic period, Mediterraneanizing the southern coastal regions of the continent. Of that most ancient phase of the struggle we have no details: no sites or dates of decisive battles, no heroes’ names. All we know is that the Mediterraneans won, and their genes gained a permanent beachhead on European soil, mixing so thoroughly with those of the Europeans that the Mediterraneans themselves became an inseparable constituent of the European race of later ages.

The second phase began about 6,000 years ago with a European counterattack. The Nordic Indo-Europeans sent wave after wave of conquerors, not only into Mediterraneanized Southern Europe and the Cro-Magnon realm in the North, but also into Asia and northern Africa.

Mixed Success

This phase lasted roughly 4,000 years and, as we have seen in earlier installments in this series, had mixed success: a new Nordic heartland was established in Northern Europe, along the coasts of the North Sea and the Baltic Sea, but elsewhere the Nordics gradually sank down into the conquered masses under them. In northern Africa the only trace remaining today of the former Nordic rulers is an occasional individual with light eyes; in Asia, from Iran to India, all that is left is a medley of Indo-European languages babbled by the swart descendants of a hundred conquered tribes originally taught those languages by a tall, golden-haired warrior aristocracy which was nowhere numerous enough to predominate genetically.

The third phase began about 16 centuries ago, in the year 372, when the Huns came swarming around the north end of the Caspian Sea into southern Russia, a Brown pestilence from Mongolia. Roughly every two or three centuries after that, through the 14th century, the same pestilence struck Europe, again and again, almost as if it were governed by some biological rhythm — perhaps a periodic overpopulation in Central Asia, forcing a mass exodus to the west in order to relieve the pressure.

Race Pollution

Europe managed to stem the Brown tide in each case, but only at enormous cost. Huge areas of Europe were overrun by the Huns and their successors: Avars, Bulgars, Khazars, Magyars, Patzinaks, Cumans, Mongols, and Ottomans. Sometimes it was more than a century before the invaders could be expelled, and a great deal of racial mixing took place meanwhile.

Some European territory was lost permanently. Even today a large section of the ancient Indo-European homeland on the western shore of the Caspian Sea remains racially Mongoloid, while pockets of racially mixed population can be found throughout Eastern and Southeastern Europe. In other areas the languages of the invaders have displaced the original European languages, even where most of the Asian genes left behind have been thoroughly diluted.

Khazar Commissars

There has not been a really massive Asian invasion of Europe since the Ottoman Turks struck in the 14th century — unless one counts the westward advance of the Red Army in the Second World War. There were Mongol units in this army, and even the units which were racially European usually were overseen by a political commissar of Khazar ancestry. But then the invading U.S. Army had about as high a quota of non-Whites in it.

So the third phase of the contest seems to be over, whether one counts its end in the 14th century or in 1945, with the fall of Berlin.

Fourth Phase?

Will there be a fourth phase in the age-old struggle between Europe and Asia? Without a doubt, although it is difficult to forecast the exact form it will take, or even which side will be on the offensive. Certainly, Central Asia has thoroughly lost the threatening aura it had in the days of Genghis Khan and the Golden Horde, and modern Turkey, wracked by internal problems, does not seem a menace to Europe, except in the stream of immigrant workers it is sending into the Western nations.

On the other hand racial Europe — including both Russia and the United States — is as disunited and as spiritually confused as it has ever been. If it is to regain the initiative in the struggle for possession of the planet, it must first regain a measure of unity, based on racial consciousness, and build new spiritual foundations for itself. The principal purpose of this series is to aid in the building of the necessary racial consciousness. So, let us begin looking again at the details.

Last Whites into Europe

The rulers of the steppe north of the Caucasus in 372 were the Sarmatian Alans. The Sarmatians were a group of Indo-European tribes most closely related to the ancient Medes, Persians, and Aryans. They were the last of the White nations to migrate westward from beyond the Urals.

Prior to the sixth century B.C. the Sarmatians lived in western Turkistan, between the Aral Sea and the western foothills of the Hindu Kush and the Pamirs. Between the sixth and fourth centuries B.C. the Alans, foremost among the Sarmatian tribes, made themselves masters of the territory between the Volga and the Don, and by the second century B.C. they had conquered nearly all the territory formerly ruled by the Royal Scyths. During the third century A.D. the Alans in turn were subdued by the Goths, but the former nevertheless remained in possession of their land north of the Caucasus.

Warrior Women

The Alans were, like the Scyths, mounted warriors, the best horsemen of the steppe. Contemporary accounts describe them as tall and handsome, blond and fair of skin. They were famed far beyond the steppe as highly skilled armorers and craftsmen. In battle they used their long spears and their characteristically long, iron swords with deadly efficiency, the women often riding and fighting alongside the men.

During the five centuries before the coming of the Goths, the Alans who ruled the territory north of the Black Sea became thoroughly amalgamated with the indigenous Slav tribes there. The princely families of nearly all the tribes had Alan ancestors, and the name of the most powerful Slav tribe, the Antes, was itself of Alan origin.

A Race of Gods

Antes, in fact, is derived from As, the name by which the Alans north of the Caucasus referred to themselves. A leading clan among them was known as the clan of the Rukhs-As (“the light, or shining, Alans”), and from this designation came the tribal name Rus, which was later adopted by the Viking rulers of Russia.

It is also interesting to note the connection between the Alans and later Scandinavian mythology. One of the two groups or factions (if Norse gods were the Aesir (singular Ass). As related in the eleventh installment of this series, the ancient legends tell of a time before the Aesir came to Scandinavia: “The land east of the Don River (i.e., the steppe north of the Caucasus, between the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea, which was the homeland of the Alans until the Huns arrived) was called Home of the Aesir, and the capital of that country they called Asgard [i.e., As(s)-stronghold]. In the capital the chieftain ruled whose name was Odin….”

End of the Golden Age

For more than a century the Scandinavian Goths mixed with the Alans and Slavs over whom they ruled. Then came the Huns. Slavs, Goths, and Alans all suffered mightily, and we have dealt with the ensuing events in an earlier installment. Perhaps the greatest tragedy of the Hun invasion was the disaster which befell the Alans. The godlike race of Odin and Frigg, of Thor and Balder, met its Ragnarok.

Although the Alan nation was not annihilated, its Golden Age was over. Some were driven south into mountain strongholds high in the Caucasus, where they maintained a national identity for another five centuries. Others fled westward, and most of these shared the fate of the Vandals in Africa. The rest became vassals of the Huns and were turned against their own race.

Bulgars and Avars

Soon after the Germans crushed the Hun empire in 454, the surviving Huns retreated eastward, eventually regrouping around the Sea of Azov. There they acquired a new name: Bulgars.

Then, in the middle of the sixth century, even before Europe had recovered from the desolation left by the Huns, the next Brown wave struck. Driven westward by intertribal warfare in Central Asia, an amalgamation of Mongol tribes known to Europeans as the Avars invaded the Russian steppe in 560. Conquering the Slavs as they went, they were only halted when they came up against the Franks on the Elbe, in 562.

The following year they wrested the eastern half of Thuringia from the Franks and extended the territory under Avar rule from the Baltic in the north to the Danube in the south, and from Thuringia in the west to the Volga in the east. The Frankish defense of their land was so fierce that the Avars were able to advance no further to the west after 563. In Central Europe, however, they wreaked havoc on Slav and German alike.

The Avars virtually annihilated the Gepids, to which nation the noble Ardaric, vanquisher of the Huns, had belonged, and seized the Gepids’ territory in Pannonia (modern Hungary), thenceforth centering the Avar empire there. They also dislodged the German Lombards (Langobarden, i.e., “long-beards”) from their ancestral lands, and the latter then invaded Italy, seizing most of the northern half of the peninsula (568-572) and making Pavia the capital of a new Lombard kingdom.

During the sixth and seventh centuries the Slavs whose homelands had been seized by the Avars expanded southwestward through the Balkans, occupying the land along the Adriatic coast as far south as Albania; and westward through Central Europe, until they came into contact with the Bavarians, the Franks, and the Saxons.

The Avar strength peaked before 600 and declined quite rapidly thereafter, except in Pannonia. Throughout the first quarter of the seventh century one group of Slavs after another asserted its independence of the Avar rulers, and by 626, in which year an Avar attack on Constantinople was repelled, the Slavs had inherited nearly the whole of the Avar empire outside Pannonia.

Europe’s Doormat

The Slavs greatly outnumbered the Avars in most areas where the two races coexisted, so that the former were biologically dominant, if not politically. The Slavs’ perennial failure to achieve political unity made them a doormat for one wave of invaders after another over the centuries. Eventually they absorbed quite a few extraneous elements, each of which left a genetic imprint.

In 576 another Brown wave lapped at Europe’s eastern frontier, as a Turkish tribe invaded the Caucasus and established a beachhead along the northwestern shore of the Caspian. Compared to the two waves which had preceded them, this was a relatively minor one, but it was to have by far the most lethal consequence for Europe in the long run: the new invaders called themselves Khazars.

Khazar Expansion

Within three-quarters of a century the Khazars had expanded their beachhead westward as far as the Dniester. In so doing they drove the Bulgar-Huns from their territory around the Sea of Azov. The latter split into two groups and fled westward and northward. Those who fled to the west seized the land between the Dniester and the lower Danube. From there they extended their grip during the next 150 years, until they ruled a Bulgar empire comprising what is now modern Rumania and Bulgaria.

Meanwhile, yet another menace to Europe coalesced from a mixture of new and ancient Asian invaders. As the Khazars, Bulgars, and other Mongol-Turkish tribes expanded to the north along the Volga and the Urals, they mixed with the Finno-Ugric tribes which had migrated to Europe long ago from Siberia. The Balts, and later the Slavs, had earlier pushed these Mongoloid peoples out of their westernmost areas of settlement along the eastern shore of the Baltic, forcing them to move to the north and east.

Magyars

Although they left their language behind in Finland and Estonia, the Finno-Ugrians were settled sparsely, were politically disunited, and were very primitive culturally. They had, therefore, not previously proved a major obstacle to the European peoples in the northeasternmost part of Europe.

Blended with their Turkish cousins, however, the Finno-Ugrians became transformed. Calling themselves Magyars, a confederation of these Mongoloid tribes began moving southwestward early in the eighth century, occupying the western half of the Khazar empire.

Origin of the Ashkenazim

The Khazars themselves also underwent a transformation during the eighth century: they adopted Judaism as their religion, and thereafter their national character began to change. From a warlike, nomadic people interested mainly in raiding and fighting, they became a nation of armed merchants and tax collectors, As the principal power in the region north of the Caucasus, they controlled trade between the Arab power to the south, the Turkish power to the east, the Volga-Bulgar power to the north, the Magyar power to the west, and the Byzantine power to the southwest.

Unfortunately, a substantial portion of the trade controlled by the Khazars was in White slaves, with the Slavs bearing the brunt. So many Slavs, both male and female, were shipped southward and eastward by their Khazar rulers that their very name gave rise to the word “slave.”

Vikings Arrive

During this time of utter misery and alien domination a new power began making its presence felt in eastern Europe: the Norsemen. As early as the sixth century these hardy Germans from Scandinavia had been establishing settlements at the eastern end of the Baltic and making expeditions up the Western Dvina into central Russia to explore, raid, and trade.

By the end of the eighth century Swedes had built major, fortified settlements at Novgorod and Kiev and set up smaller trading posts far south into Khazar territory. In 825 they built another major stronghold on the Taman Peninsula (separating the Sea of Azov from the Black Sea), directly challenging Khazar hegemony. They also fought the Magyars, whipped them, and seized much of their territory. The whole area around the lower Don came to be known as “Great Sweden.”

Birth of a Nation

These Swedish adventurers, who called themselves Varangers, mingled freely with the remnants of the Alans and with the Alanized Slavs (Antes) in the area they conquered, and it was not long before those who stayed had adopted the names As and Rus for themselves.

When the Khazars began taking measures to resist the Swedish inroads, the Swedes sent out a call for reinforcements. The call was answered by Rurik, ruler of southern Jutland and Friesland, who had already made a name for himself as an adventurer, warrior, and pirate in the North Sea area. Rurik arrived in northern Russia, near Novgorod,. in or about the year 856, and his arrival is considered to mark the beginning of Russian national history.\

Franks Crush Avars

Meanwhile, the Franks, under Charlemagne, almost totally annihilated the Avars in Hungary in 796. Unfortunately, the Danube Bulgars almost immediately took the place of the Avars. The Bulgars, however, had better sense than to attempt to interfere with the protectorate which the Franks established at this time over the Slavs of Bohemia, Moravia, Austria, and Croatia.

When Frankish authority over these Slavs weakened after the death of Charlemagne, they enjoyed a rare interlude of autonomy. The Slav Kingdom of Great Moravia arose, but it was short-lived.

Around 860 another Mongolian wavelet struck, with the arrival of the Patzinak Turks. They immediately quarreled with the Magyars and defeated them, which led the latter to move west. In 893 the entire Magyar nation crossed the Carpathians, defeated the Bulgars, and seized Hungary.

Sviatoslav the Great

Prince Rurik, ruler of Novgorod, died in 879, and he was succeeded by his kinsman Oleg, a Norwegian by birth, who united the principalities of Novgorod and Kiev and then energetically expanded the territory under Rus rule. Viking Russia rapidly became the principal power in the east.

In 964 Rurik’s grandson Sviatoslav, later acclaimed “the Great,” ascended the throne of Russia. Christian missionaries were beginning to ply their trade in Russia, and Sviatoslav’s mother Olga had allowed herself to be baptized, but this proud Viking lord would have none of it; he insisted on holding to the faith of his Scandinavian forebears.

Sviatoslav was a man of extraordinary strength, resourcefulness, and energy. The ancient chroniclers wrote that he was as brave and quick as a panther.

In the field his armies moved without baggage trains, and he shared all the hardships of his men: he ate no boiled meat, but cooked horseflesh or game over the coals of the campfire; he carried no tent, but slept in the open on a saddle cloth and used a saddle for a pillow. When he attacked he scorned the use of stealth, but instead sent messengers ahead announcing, “I come against you.”

Driving out the Money Changers

It is fitting that such a warrior, almost as soon as he took the rule, chose as his first task the elimination of the Khazar pestilence. In 965 he utterly laid waste the Khazar empire (to the accompaniment, no doubt, of loud wails protesting his “anti-Semitism”). It can only be regretted that he did not hunt down and dispatch the last member of the tribe; instead he merely scattered them to the four winds, and their descendants, who make up the bulk of eastern Europe’s Jews, are taking their revenge to this day on the White world.

Sviatoslav then turned his attention to the Danube Bulgars, and in 967 he decisively defeated them. He was forced to abandon his Bulgarian conquest, however, when the Patzinaks attacked Kiev. He relieved the city, but a few years later, in 972, he fell in battle against the same enemy.

Back in Central Europe the Magyars, as soon as they had taken possession of Hungary, became the scourge of their German, Slav, and Byzantine neighbors for the next half century, raiding as far afield as Bremen, Orleans, and Constantinople. In 954 a raiding party of close to 100,000 Magyars swept through Bavaria and into Franconia, crossed the Rhine at Worms, and devastated northeastern France. They raped, burned, and butchered their way through Rheims and Chalons into Burgundy, then crossed the Alps into Italy to pillage Lombardy.

Again it was the Germans to the rescue. The following year another Magyar army invaded Bavaria and besieged Augsburg. Otto I, the Saxon king, arrived with an army of only 10,000 men and annihilated the Magyar force, in the battle of the Lechfeld. The Germans pursued and slew fleeing Magyars for three days following the battle, and the Magyars were never after that a major threat to Europe.

Patzinaks, Cumans, Seljuks

For nearly three centuries after the taming of the Magyars and the Bulgars and the destruction of the Khazar power, Europe remained relatively free of major new woes from Asia. Not entirely free, however: in 1060 the pressure of newly arrived Turkish tribes behind the Patzinaks pushed the latter westward into the Balkans, while the former occupied the southern Ukraine. In 1068 these new arrivals, the Cumans, seized the Crimean peninsula, which had been the last Gothic stronghold in the east since the Hun invasion nearly 700 years earlier. And in 1071 the Byzantines lost the decisive battle of Manzikert to the Seljuks, another group of Turks, allowing the latter to overrun most of Asia Minor within the next few years.

During the following 150 years the Russians held their own against the Cumans, while the thoroughly decadent Byzantines managed to keep the Seljuks at bay. In the north Europe actually gained ground, as the Swedes continued their colonization of Finland, driving the Finno-Ugrian natives toward the Arctic Circle.

Diversity of the Invaders

It should be noted here that there was a fair amount of diversity in the various Asian waves which had been impinging on Europe’s eastern frontier since the fourth century. All the groups involved spoke languages of the Ural-Altaic group (the Magyars spoke a Uralic language; all the others spoke Altaic); they were all mounted nomads; and they all contained a strong Mongoloid racial element.

It was primarily in this last feature that the diversity was found. Each group passed through a vast expanse of territory in reaching Europe, and this territory was not empty. Although the Sarmatians were the last White group to enter Europe from the east, there were other Whites left in Turkistan — and even further east — who didn’t make it to Europe before the first Brown wave from Central Asia washed over them and submerged them.

Green-eyed Mongol

Some of the Asian invaders traveled quite rapidly through the peoples between their own homelands and Europe, absorbing little if any White blood on the way, while others took centuries to make the passage. Even those who did not linger among White or part-White populations often had absorbed some White genes as a result of the slave trade. From the fourth century through the l5th century there was an enormous traffic in White slaves, with millions of Slavs trudging eastward in slave caravans.

Thus, while the Mongols who struck in the 13th century passed like lightning from Mongolia to the eastern border of Europe, their chieftain, Genghis Khan, was described by contemporaries as having green eyes and reddish hair — undoubtedly a consequence of the slave trade. Some Turkish leaders were described as almost White in appearance.

Finally, we must remember that race treason is not a new phenomenon. Conquered Slav, Sarmatian, and German peoples sometimes became military auxiliaries of their Brown conquerors. When Attila was defeated by the Visigoths in 451 at Chalons, his horde consisted not only of Brown Huns but also of a number of White allies from the territories through which he had passed.

“Lord of the Earth”

The first years of the 13th century saw the rise of the next and most terrible of the Asian menaces. In 1206 a Mongol chieftain, Temujin, succeeded in unifying the numerous, perennially quarreling factions and tribes of Mongolia. He then set out on a career of conquest which has never been equaled. In preparation for this career he changed his name to Genghis Khan — “lord of the earth.”

Genghis Khan’s first raiding parties reached Europe in 1221 and won several victories over the princes of southern Russia. Genghis Khan died in 1227, giving Europe a brief respite which it failed to put to good use. When the Mongol horde appeared on Europe’s border again in 1236, a campaign of terror not matched since the days of the Huns was unleashed.

Flight in the Winter

Whole areas of southern Russia were depopulated, and Mongol raiders struck deep into the Balkans, Hungary, northern Russia, Poland, and even Germany. In scenes foreshadowing the winter of 1944-5, hundreds of thousands of terrified refugees fled westward as the Mongols, moving rapidly across frozen rivers in the dead of winter, destroyed everything in their path. In Russia the Mongols even sent squadrons back into cities which had been sacked a few days earlier, in order to hunt down and kill any survivors who might have crept out of their hiding places.

An army of Germans, Poles, and Teutonic Knights, under the command of Duke Henry II of Silesia, attempted to halt the Mongols at Liegnitz, Prussia. In a battle fought there on April 9, 1241, the Europeans were decisively defeated. Just two days later another Mongol column completely destroyed the Hungarian army at the Sajo River, about 100 miles northeast of Budapest.

Providential Death

These two crushing defeats left Central Europe completely at the mercy of the Mongols, who proceeded to consolidate their hold on Hungary and made plans to invade Italy, Austria, and Germany the following winter.

Just after Christmas of 1241 they started westward across the frozen Danube — when suddenly a messenger arrived from Karakorum, 6,000 miles to the east, bearing word that Ogatai, Genghis Khan’s successor, had died. The Mongols immediately turned their army around and marched back to the east, never to return.

All of eastern and southern Russia remained under occupation by the Mongol horde, however, and the rest of Russia escaped occupation only by acknowledging itself a vassal state and paying tribute to the Mongols.

Lithuanian Flowering

During the following century the one Eastern European nation which not only avoided being conquered but which actually gained substantial territory at the expense of the Mongols was Baltic Lithuania. As Mongol strength declined during the 14th century, the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, stretching from the Baltic to the Black Sea, became the most powerful state in Eastern Europe.

In 1380 Grand Duke Dmitri of Moscow and Prince Vladimir of Serpukhov made the first successful Russian challenge to the Mongol conquerors. In an enormous battle fought between Russian and Mongol forces on September 8 on the upper Don, near the site of the present village of Kulikovo, the Russians won a decisive, though costly victory. This victory did not throw off the Mongol yoke, but it loosened it and helped make it possible for Ivan the Great, exactly a century later, to do so. Then, during the l6th century, the Russians regained the territory which had been occupied by the Mongol horde since early in the 13th century.

Race before Creed

Today the Soviet Union includes not only Russians but also a number of peoples of Mongoloid race, including the descendants of the 13th-century Mongol conquerors of Russia — all supposedly “equal” in the eyes of the state and the Communist Party. In view of this, it is quite interesting to note that Grand Duke Dmitri of Moscow, surnamed Donskoi after his great victory on the Don, is an official hero of the Soviet Union.

The Soviet government maintains a huge monument to him on the site of the battle, and in 1980, on the 600th anniversary of his Kulikovo victory, Soviet Life and other Soviet publications carried glowing tributes to this great “savior of the motherland.”

Racial feeling, apparently, is not dead in the Soviet Union.

End of an Empire

While the Mongols were being overcome by the Lithuanians and Russians in the north, things were not going so well for Europe in the south. In 1353 the Ottomans, a Turkish tribe newly arrived in Asia Minor from the east, having overwhelmed the Seljuks, crossed the Bosporus and began a rapid expansion of their bridgehead on European soil. Within a few decades the Byzantine Empire was reduced to the city of Constantinople plus a few enclaves in the Balkans.

A century after the first Ottoman landing on the European side of the Bosporus, the Turks stormed and took Constantinople (May 29, 1453), putting a final end to a world empire which one can reckon to have begun 2206 years earlier, with the founding of Rome. Shortly thereafter they occupied the rest of the Balkan peninsula, and for more than two centuries they posed an active threat to other areas of Central and Eastern Europe.

The Janissaries

The most effective means which the Ottomans employed in their struggle against White Europe, and the most humiliating to their White adversaries, was their corps of Janissaries. The Janissaries were the Ottomans’ elite army and they were entirely White.

During the reign of Emir Orkhan (1326-1359), the Ottoman ruler who first seized European soil, an edict was issued commanding the Emir’s White subjects to deliver to him each year exactly 1,000 young, male children. These children, who were required to have faces “white and shining,” were torn from their mothers’ breasts and then raised by the Turks with special care and rigor, trained in arms from a tender age and conditioned to give absolute obedience to their masters. Their military discipline was especially severe, but they were liberally rewarded for courage and proficiency.

Turkish Retreat

The yearly levy of 1,000 White children was continued for 300 years, until 1648, and during that period the Janissaries came to be the most efficient and feared corps of warriors in the world. They sustained the Turkish power in Central Europe, while the Mongol power in Eastern Europe withered.

Hungary was the unfortunate battleground between Europeans and the Turks and their Janissaries during much of this time, with ownership of various parts or the whole passing back and forth from one side to the other.

At times the Turks entertained dreams of a general conquest of Europe, and it was not until the failure of their second siege of Vienna in 1683 that they began a slow retreat which lasted almost another two and one-half centuries. Even today Turkey retains a beachhead of several thousand square miles on the European side of the Bosporus.

Bastardized Balkans

The Ottoman Turks were the last of the Asian invaders of Europe, but they were certainly not the least. Their occupation has left as severe a racial imprint on the Balkan peoples — Yugoslavs, Albanians, Greeks, Bulgarians, and Rumanians – as the Mongol occupation did on the Russians.

Nevertheless, there remain today many groups throughout the Balkans which are as White as any group in Western Europe: some are immigrants from the north during recent centuries, while others are the descendants of clans and tribes which jealously guarded the purity of their blood and were able to avoid substantial racial mixture even during the darkest days of Asian occupation.

ILLUSTRATIONS

a) RUS WARRIOR of 11th-century Kievan Russia had his work cut out for him. Not only were there roving bands of Cumans, Bulgars, and Patzinaks to contend with, but the Viking rulers of the many Rus principalities were often at one another’s throats. The armor and weaponry shown on this knight came to Russia from Sweden, but by this time Swedish and Slavic ways were well on the way to blending.

b) EUROPE’S contested eastern and southeastern borderlands have been repeatedly occupied by Asian invaders.

c) RUSSIAN AND MONGOL battled for control of Russia during 13th century. Mongol horde overwhelmed and depopulated southern Russia, forced rest of Russia to acknowledge Mongol overlordship.

d) MONGOLS are at the gates of Liegnitz in 1241, after defeating the army of Duke Henry. They are carrying Henry’s head on a lance.

e) BATTLE OF KOSSOVO in 1389, between Slavic Serbs and Turkish Ottomans was won by Turks. Serbs became vassals of Turks, who soon thereafter subjected other Balkan peoples.

f) GENGHIS KHAN

g) BATTLE OF KULIKOVO in 1380, in which Russians under Duke Dmitri of Moscow decisively defeated a Mongol army, marked a turning point in the struggle between Whites and Browns for mastery of Russia. This painting of the battle scene was made for an article in Soviet Life commemorating the 600th anniversary of the White victory.

Plus one unlabeled drawing

Just as it was the Northmen who, by imposing order on Europe’s eastern frontier in the second half of the first millennium, stiffened that frontier and made Russia a White racial bulwark against the non-White hordes of Asia, it was also the Northmen who, in the same era, pushed Europe’s western frontier westward across the great, unknown Ocean Sea, opening up new lands for settlement by succeeding generations of our race.

Called many names — Danes, Geats, Norsemen, Rus, Swedes, Varangers — they are best known to us by the name which is also used to characterize both the age in which they flourished and the way of life of many of them: Vikings. Like two great waves of raiders, conquerors, and colonizers before them, the Goths and the Anglo-Saxons, they came from the Nordic heartland: southern Sweden and Norway, the Danish peninsula, the adjoining portion of northern Germany, and the nearby North Sea and Baltic islands.

Essence of Whiteness

They are of special interest to us in our endeavor to understand who we are, not so much because most of us have Viking forebears (although a great many people with immediate roots in Ireland, Scotland, England, and northwestern France, as well as in Scandinavia, do), but because they give us a clearer, more detailed picture of that pure essence of Indo-Europeanism of Whiteness — which is the common heritage of all of us, whether our recent ancestors were Germans, Celts, Balts, or Slavs, than we can obtain from a study of any other European people.

German in language like the Goths and the Anglo-Saxons, the Vikings retained other aspects of Germanic culture which those earlier emigrants from the Nordic heartland had already lost by the dawn of the Viking Age. In particular, the Vikings held to their Indo-European religion and world view longer than any of the other Germanic peoples. They also remained hardier, fiercer in battle, and more venturesome than those who had been softened by the more civilized living to the south.

Enthusiastic Piracy

The Vikings lived by farming, stockbreeding, craftsmanship, and trade like the others, but they ventured farther afield in their trading enterprise, and they customarily and enthusiastically combined it with piracy, whence came their name. (The Old Norse noun viking meant piracy or a pirate raid, and a vikingr was a person who engaged in viking.)

Because they had extensive dealings with their literate cousins elsewhere in Europe and influenced the lives of the latter very strongly over a period of more than 300 years, we have a great deal of firsthand information about the Vikings. Whereas our knowledge of the lifestyles and mores of most of the other pre-Christian peoples of Europe comes primarily from the archaeologists — and, in some cases, from a handful of surviving Classical writings — we have hundreds of extant firsthand accounts of the Vikings, dating from as late as the 11th century.

Furthermore, we have the Vikings’ own words. Their sagas, an enormously rich treasury of history and legend, law and religion, custom and technique, passed from the oral to the written stage relatively quickly — in the case of some of the historical sagas, within a few years — and therefore provide a generally more reliable source of information than the early histories of many other preliterate peoples.

Best and Worst in Our Race

The Vikings not only serve us as an especially useful epitome of Whiteness at a time when our survival demands a renewal of the best of our old values and strengths, but they also provide us with a clear reminder of the danger inherent in one of our most lethal weaknesses: excessive individualism and lack of racial solidarity. A study of the Vikings acquaints us with both the best and the worst (or, in this age, the least affordable) of the characteristics of our race.

We have already examined, in the 15th installment of this series, the origins and the basic racial components of the proto-Germans, from whom the Vikings descended. The Vikings themselves recognized at least two of these racial components: one a tall, fair, light-eyed, long-headed race (Nordic); and the other a shorter, darker, round-headed race, perhaps with a Mongoloid admixture.

Jarls, Karls, and Thralls

A tenth-century Viking narrative poem, Rigsthula (Song of Rig), provides a fanciful account of the origins of the Scandinavian population. In it a traveler named Rig (i.e., “king”) is given lodging at three dwellings. At each he manages to impregnate the woman of the house before he leaves, thereby fathering three sons.

The first woman is old and wrinkled, and she dwells in a hovel. The son she bears for Rig is dark, stooped, and ugly. He is named Thrall, and from him is descended the race of serfs and slaves, the hewers of wood and the carriers of water.

The second woman is younger, better looking, better housed, and more industrious. Her son by Rig is a sturdy, light-eyed boy, and is given the name Karl. From Karl is descended the race of free peasants and craftsmen.

The third woman is young, tall, blond, and lovely, and the house in which she lives is large and magnificent. She bears Rig a son who is strong and straight of limb, white of skin, fair of hair, light of eyes, and quick of mind. He is named Jarl (Earl), and he quickly learns the magic of the runes and the mastery of weapons. He hunts, rides, fights, and fears no man. From him is descended the race of kings and lords of the earth.

Racial Memory

Rig himself is identified with the Norse god Heimdall, the whitest of all the gods and the father of all mankind. Rigsthula reminds us of the ancient Aryan religious work, the Rigveda, which, more than 20 centuries earlier, also gave a fanciful account of the origins of the races. It is clear that Rig’s descendants via Thrall represent the dark, round-headed element in the Scandinavian population, and that this element was at some time in the past held in a servile status by a largely Nordic ruling class.

Scandinavian mythology may also reflect racial memories of early contacts between Nordic invaders and Cro-Magnon natives, in the numerous references to “frost giants.”

In any event, by the dawn of the Viking Age a general mixing had taken place. Thralls may still have been darker, on the average, than the free farmers or the nobility, but one could find Nordic slaves, largely the consequence of the Viking policy of enslaving prisoners of war, and one could also find darker elements among the wealthy and powerful, as evidenced by the names of such leaders as Halfdan the Black (ninth-century king of a Viking realm in southern Norway). By far the dominant racial element among the Vikings, however, was Nordic.

Lapps and Finns

To the north of the Northmen, in Norway, Sweden, and Finland, were the Lapps, a very primitive race which lived a nomadic life and gained its sustenance primarily from the reindeer of the forest and tundra. The sixth-century historians Jordanes and Procopius describe the Lapps as being culturally little above the beasts on which they preyed.

Both racially and linguistically the Lapps were closely related to the Finno-Ugric tribes to the east. They were short, predominantly dark (although today some Lapps are blond, apparently having absorbed Nordic genes), broad-nosed, and extremely round-headed. They were certainly partly, and perhaps wholly, responsible for the dark element among the Vikings, although there was little mixing between Vikings and Lapps during the Viking Age, because of their entirely different lifestyles. The mixing must have taken place during the prehistoric period, perhaps shortly after the proto-Germans arrived in Scandinavia and before they had driven the ancestors of the Lapps further north.

Contrasting Spirits

As is often the case in racial crossings, however, instead of producing a stable hybrid race the mixing of the two types resulted in the repeated and unpredictable reemergence of the darker, minority strain among the Nordic majority. Nor were complexion, stature, and head shape the only persistent differences between the two types: the sagas tell us over and over of the temperamental and spiritual differences, with the Nordic being open-minded, levelheaded, imaginative, objective, and, above all, venturesome; and the other being conservative, subjective, suspicious, and prone to emotional excesses.

The Viking spirit was a Nordic spirit, but it was a Nordic spirit tempered and honed by the very special environment in which the Northmen lived. The coastal region of southwestern Norway, containing the Rogaland, Hordaland, and Sogn districts, provides an example which is perhaps extreme, but nevertheless useful in understanding the influence of this environment. A rocky, inhospitable coast is broken up by numerous, often precipitous fjords. Patches of land suitable for farming and grazing tend to be rather small, and they are separated by mountainous terrain which becomes impassable during large portions of the year. There is relatively little room for inland expansion beyond the heads of the fjords.

No Viking Democrats

The men who inhabited this region were necessarily self-reliant, tenacious, energetic, and resourceful. No anemic democrats these: the terrain was not suited to the placid, ant-heap mentality of lesser races to the south; it bred men with strong wills and stronger egos, a natural warrior aristocracy. Furthermore, the terrain naturally directed their attention and their energy outward, toward the lands which could be reached by the sea which played such an important role in the lives of these fjord-dwellers. Whether their need was for more land to accommodate an expanding population, for gold or women to be plundered from less warlike peoples, or simply for an outlet for their restless, questing natures, the fjords and the sea, together with their superb, almost instinctive seamanship, provided the means.

It should not be surprising, then, that the first Vikings of the Viking Age came from southwestern Norway, and that this region continued to send forth Vikings as late as the latter half of the 11th century, when the other Viking lands had largely put their predatory ways behind them.

Cultural Unity

The isolation by terrain and climate of many Viking communities did not prevent the Vikings from having a remarkable unity of culture, language, and spirit but it certainly did not encourage political unity. Viking individualism seemed to be inimical to a sense of racial solidarity. While more subjective races to the south were often drawn together by the perceived need for mutual support in the face of a hostile world, Vikings were much more inclined to face the world as individuals.

Their loyalty and sense of community seldom extended beyond the fighting band to which they belonged — or, at most, to that limited region of Norway or Denmark or whatever which they considered “home” — and they would as gladly — or almost as gladly — hew down the Vikings of a rival band as a monastery full of trembling priests in some southern land. Within the band, however, the Viking ethos demanded a solidarity as uncompromising as that of the other Germanic peoples of their time.

Advent of the Dragon Ship

Warriors from Scandinavia and northwestern Germany had been raiding Britain and the coasts of Gaul and Spain since Roman times, but historians generally date the beginning of the Viking Age at the middle of the eighth century, with the development of the Viking longship or dragon ship: the long, strong, flexible, shallow-draft vessel, propelled by both sail and oars, with high prow fore and aft, which was ideally suited to its task of carrying anywhere from 20 to 100 armed men (and often their horses as well) swiftly across the North Sea, up rivers and inlets to unsuspecting communities which were often far inland, and then making a fast getaway with booty and captives, leaving slower pursuing craft in its wake.

The dragon ships made their first appearance in the historical record in 787, with a raid on England’s south coast. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle reports:

In this year (King) Beorhtric took to wife Eadburh, daughter of King Offa. And in his days came for the first time three ships of Norwegians from Hordaland, and then the king’s reeve rode thither and tried to make them go to the royal manor, for he did not know who or what they were, and with that they killed him. These were the first ships of the Danes to come to England.

Conquest of the Danelaw

Through the 790’s and the first years of the ninth century, Vikings struck the English coast more and more often. And, like the Angles and Saxons before them, many of them came not just to raid but to seize land and stay. By 870 Vikings had conquered most of England north of Wessex and had established a number of settlements in Ireland as well, where they founded Dublin, Limerick, Wexford, and many other communities.

The Saxon king, Alfred of Wessex (Alfred the Great), who ruled from 871-899, halted the further Viking conquest of England and even pushed the invaders back in a few places, but by then the Viking presence in England was permanent and irreversible. East-central and most of northern England became known as “the Danelaw,” where Viking customs prevailed over those of the Saxons. (The Vikings of the Danelaw were by no means all Danes; to the settled and civilized English, however, all Vikings, regardless of their country of origin, looked alike, and the names of the various Scandinavian countries were often applied to them indiscriminately.)

An Endless Flood

On the Continent too the ninth century was a period of growing pressure from the north. A Frankish chronicler writes:

The number of ships increases; the endless flood of Vikings never ceases to grow bigger, Everywhere Christ’s people are the victims of massacre, burning, and plunder. The Vikings overrun all that lies before them, and none can withstand them. They seize Bordeaux, Perigueux, Limoges, Angouleme, Toulouse; Angers, Tours, and Orleans are made deserts. Ships past counting voyage up the Seine…. Rouen is laid waste, looted, and burned. Paris, Beauvais, Meaux are taken; Melun’s stronghold is razed to the ground; Chartres occupied; Evreux and Bayeux looted; and every town invested.

Ralph the Walker

Just as in England and Ireland, however, Vikings who at first came only to seize women and gold later came to seize land as well. This process reached its climax early in the 10th century when a Viking band wrested away from the West Franks a substantial piece of territory in northwestern France, south of the lower Seine. In 911 the Frankish king Charles the Simple, the great-great-grandson of Charlemagne, gave legal sanction to this conquest by recognizing the Viking leader Ganga-Hrolf as his vassal and confirming the latter in the ownership of the land which his band had already seized.

Ganga-Hrolf (i.e., Hrolf the Ganger or Ralph the Walker, so named because he was too large to be carried by any horse), called Rollo by the French, in turn submitted to baptism and settled down to the task of enlarging and consolidating his domain. He was the first Duke of Normandy, as his land came to be known, after its Nor(se)man conquerors.

Eric the Red and Leif the Lucky

Throughout the eighth and ninth centuries the Vikings also conquered and settled other lands. In the last installment we looked at their exploits in the east, among the Slavs. To the west they colonized the Hebrides, Orkney, Shetland, and Faroe Islands.

In 861 a Swedish Viking made the first circumnavigation of Iceland, and other Vikings immediately followed to establish settlements on the island. A century later an Iceland Viking, Eric the Red, led the first band of settlers to the uninhabited island of Greenland, which had been sighted a few years earlier by another Viking seaman.

In the year 986 the Viking Bjarni Herjulfsson, sailing from Norway to Greenland, missed his intended destination and instead found himself off the coast of a previously unknown land: North America. Bjarni did not land, but he carried the news of his sighting back to Greenland.

Leif, the son of Eric the Red, bought Bjarni’s ship from him and set out to see the new land for himself. He established a small settlement at a place he called Vinland, on the island of Newfoundland, but he only spent one winter there.

First White American

A few years later another Greenland Viking, Thorfinn Karlsefni, made a determined effort to establish a permanent Viking presence in America. He fitted out three longships and recruited 160 men and women to accompany him on the westward voyage. They built a community in North America which they called Straumfjord, and in 1004 Thorfinn’s wife Gudrid bore him a son, Snorri, there: the first native White American.

Unrelenting attacks by Indians — Skraelings to the Vikings — made life very difficult for Thorfinn’s American colonists, however, and after three years they abandoned their settlement and returned to Greenland.

Had the Vikings’ weapons been technologically superior to the bows and arrows of the Skraelings — as Columbus’ firearms were — then White history in America would have begun 500 years sooner than it did. As it was, the individual superiority of the Viking warriors in battle could not make up for the enormous numerical advantage enjoyed by the hordes of Red men who opposed them.

In 1962 archaeologists excavated the ruins of what is believed to have been Straumfjord, near the present Newfoundland village of L’Anse aux Meadows.

Victims of White Slavers

In Greenland too, with is utterly inhospitable environment, the Viking presence did not last. Initially there were no hostile Skraelings in Greenland — in fact, the first Eskimos did not arrive on the island until nearly 400 years after the Vikings — but the total lack of trees, metal ores, and other natural resources, together with the scarcity of farmland, kept the White population down to a maximum of 3,000 persons, scattered among some 300 farms.

Ironically, it seems to have been piracy which was the undoing of the Greenland Vikings. Although they were Christianized shortly after the year 1,000 and gave up their warlike ways and the raiding of other lands for gold and women, there was still a strong demand for blond slave girls in Moorish Spain and North Africa and in the Turkish lands to the southeast. The demand was met by pirates recruited in England and Germany by Jewish middlemen, who began raiding the island settlements of the North Atlantic in the 14th century.

Iceland — which suffered its last attack by White-slaving pirates as late as the 19th century — and the other Viking islands survived the raids, but Greenland did not.

Purest Cultural Heritage

Today these North Atlantic islands, of which Iceland with its quarter-million inhabitants is the most significant, preserve the Viking cultural heritage in its purest form. The modern Icelandic and Faroese languages are nearly identical to the Old Norse spoken by the Vikings, while English and the other Germanic languages have undergone great changes during the last 1,000 years. In folkways as well, many Viking traits have been preserved in the islands, especially in Iceland and the Faroes. There has even been a return to the Viking religion by some Icelanders in recent years.

Racially, Iceland does not present quite as pure a picture as one might wish, for the ninth-century Viking settlers were not all jarls and karls; they brought their thralls along with them as well. Despite this lapse, their descendants today are biologically closer to the original Viking stock than the population of any other country. This racial quality is reflected not only in the tallest average statute in the White world, but in the highest literacy rate (100 per cent) as well.

Not only do all Icelanders read and write, but a far higher proportion of them are authors than is true for any other country. And, despite her tiny population, which is able to support only a single university, Iceland is able to boast a larger per capita Nobel Laureate quota than any other nation on earth.

No Minorities

Iceland is outstanding in another respect as well: alone among the White nations of the world it does not bear the curse of non-White minorities; it has no Blacks, no Jews, no Vietnamese, no Mexicans. Iceland has not been invaded for the last 1,000 years, except during the Second World War, when the country was occupied by American troops. The bulk of the foreigners withdrew after the war, and Icelanders insisted that future U.S. troops sent to man the air base which the United States was allowed to maintain on the island include no non-Whites.

The greatest debt that the White race owes to Icelanders is for their preservation of the Norse literary heritage: the Viking sagas. While church officials in other European countries were rounding up and burning all the pre-Christian books they could lay their hands on during the Middle Ages, Icelandic scholars were busy writing down the sagas which still existed only in oral form and transcribing, annotating, and expanding those which had been put into writing earlier.

Even where we must use extreme caution in drawing historical data from the sagas, they give us a clear and unambiguous picture of the Viking ethos and the Viking world view, of Viking attitudes, beliefs, feelings and temperament.

Shaping of the Viking Age

Fortunately, when it is Norse history we want we have the records of the Vikings’ literate Frankish and English cousins to supplement and clarify the semi-legendary material of the sagas. From these records we can also gain a good deal of insight into some of the external forces and circumstances which raised the curtain on the Viking Age in the eighth century and then lowered it in the 11th.

One of the forces was certainly the tide of Christendom which was rising over Europe from the south during the eighth century. The Franks had become Christianized during the sixth century, after their king, Chlodwig (Clovis), accepted baptism, but the Saxons, the immediate neighbors of the Northmen, rejected the alien religion from the Levant and held to their ancestral ways, as did the Northmen themselves, of course.

Genocidal Evangelism

Beginning in 772, a year after he became sole king of the Franks upon the death of his brother Carloman, Karl, later known to the French as Charlemagne, son of Pepin the Short and grandson of Karl the Hammer, waged a 32-year campaign of genocidal evangelism against the Saxons. The campaign began with Karl’s destruction of the Irminsul, or World Pillar, the Saxon equivalent of the Norse World Ash, Yggdrasil, located in the Saxons’ most sacred grove, at Eresburg (on the site of the present Marburg), and it became bloodier, crueler, and more intolerant as it wore on.

In 774, at Quierzy, Karl issued a proclamation that he would kill every Saxon who refused to accept the sweet yoke of Jesus. Henceforth a contingent of Christian priests accompanied the Frankish army on its expeditions against the Saxons, and in every Saxon village those who refused to be baptized by the priests were slaughtered on the spot.

Butchery at Verden

Karl’s savagery reached a peak in the tenth year of the evangelism: in 782, at Verden on the Aller, with the blessing of the Church, he had 4,500 Saxon nobles beheaded. Twelve years later, in 794, he introduced a policy under which every third Saxon was uprooted from his land and forced to resettle among Franks or other Christianized tribes.

Fairly early in this campaign, in 777, one of the most prominent of the Saxon chieftains, Widukind, took shelter among the Danes and appealed to their king, Sigfred, for assistance against the Franks. Although the Danes were wary of becoming involved in a full-scale war against the formidable Karl, they and the other Northern peoples were put on their guard, and they became increasingly indignant over the Frankish suppression of the Saxons’ religion.

Karl’s brutal campaign against the Saxons undoubtedly helped raise a certain consciousness in the North of the spiritual and cultural differences which separated Scandinavia from those lands which had fallen under the yoke of the Christian Church.

Special Treatment

One manifestation of this consciousness was the erection of the Danevirke, an extensive system of defensive earthworks across the neck of the Danish peninsula, begun in 808.

Another was the special treatment which the Vikings customarily meted out to the Christian monks and priests who fell into their hands. The monasteries and churches, with their troves of treasure mulcted from superstitious citizens seeking to buy their way into heaven, were tempting targets to the raiders from the North anyway, but the element of revenge must have made them even more tempting, and it was for good reason that throughout the ninth century the daily prayer of every pious cleric was: “A furore Normannorum libera nos, Domine!” (“From the fury of the Northmen deliver us, Lord!”)

The internal forces leading to the eruption of the Vikings from their Northern fjords were even stronger than the external ones. Among the former was a very high birthrate specifically among the most active and aggressive of the Northmen, the result of their customary practice of polygyny.

The Most for the Best

According to the 11th-century German ecclesiastical historian, Adam of Bremen, every Swede of more than average substance kept two or three wives, while the nobility had no limit to the number of women they allowed themselves. For example, Harald Fairhair, the Norwegian warrior who unified Norway in the ninth century and became its first king, had as many as 40 sons by some accounts, at least nine of whom are known to history; and Harald’s son Erik Bloodaxe had at least eight sons who grew to manhood.

In the capitalistic South such a practice may have meant only that the cleverest and crookedest paper-shufflers — i.e., the richest men — would have more progeny, on the average, than honest workingmen, but in the hard living North, where every man’s mettle was tested almost daily by his environment and by his fellows, it was marvelously eugenic: the strong, the able, and the aggressive had proportionately more children than they would have had in a monogamous society.

Genetic Effects of Monkery

Another interesting eugenic contrast between North and South is provided by the Christian practice of clerical celibacy. Although there were many periods during the Middle Ages in which violations were commonplace, as early as the fourth century the Church began insisting on total celibacy for the higher clergy. With the growing incidence of monasticism after the sixth century, a greatly increased portion of the population of Christian Europe was subjected to the rule of celibacy.

In the Middle Ages the clerical life was not, as is often the case today, simply a refuge for those who could succeed at nothing else; it was usually the only route to scholarship — and often the only route to literacy as well — and it attracted many able and intelligent men, whose genes were then lost to their race. For a thousand years, until the Reformation, there was a selective draining away of Christian Europe’s intellectual vitality.

A Mighty Hive

The high birthrate among the most active and energetic elements of the population in the Northern countries led to land-hunger and the drive for external conquests. In the words of l7th-century English statesman and writer Sir William Temple: “Each of these countries was like a mighty hive, which, by the vigor of propagation and health of climate, growing too full of people, threw out some new swarm at certain periods of time that took wing and sought out some new abode, expelling or subduing the old inhabitants and seating themselves in their rooms.” This state of affairs also held long before the Viking Age, of course.

In addition to the generalized effects of a high birthrate, two other consequences of polygyny which bore on the rise of viking as a way of life were the large numbers of second, third, fourth, and later sons in the families of Norse landholders — sons left without inheritance and without land, unless they could wrest it away from someone else — and a shortage of women.

The most popular way to solve the latter problem was to go on a raid and carry off women from Ireland, England, or France, although there was also a heavy traffic in Slav slave girls from the Rus realms. The Hrafnsmal tells of life in Harald Fairhair’s court: “Glorious is their way of life, those warriors who play chess in Harald’s court. They are made rich with money and fine swords, with metal of Hunaland and girls from the east.”

Victory at Hafrsfjord

The political consolidation which began taking place in Scandinavia in the ninth century served as an especially strong impetus to Viking colonizers. As mentioned earlier, the Vikings were extremely individualistic, extremely resentful of any encroachments on their freedom of action. After Harald Fairhair won a great sea victory at Hafrsfjord over the Viking chieftains of western Norway in 872, many of them left Norway with their households and their followers and settled in Iceland and the smaller islands of the North Atlantic rather than submit to Harald’s rule.

A century later, political consolidation having been achieved, Scandinavian monarchs began to realize the policy advantages in bringing their people into the same religious camp as their neighbors to the south. The first to take the step was Denmark’s Harald Bluetooth, son of King Gorm the Old. In 965, 15 years after Gorm’s death, Harald allowed himself to be baptized, and then he undertook the forcible conversion of the rest of the Danes: a move which did not sit well with many and led to further emigration and turmoil in the North. It also led eventually to Harald’s deposition and banishment.

Jomsvikings

It is from this period that the legend of the Jomsvikings arose. The legend tells of dispossessed Viking émigrés establishing a fortress in Slavic Wendland (Pomerania), at the mouth of the Oder. Called Jomsborg, this fortress in time became the home of an ideal military brotherhood.

Ruled on Spartan principles, an all-male community of warriors between the ages of 18 and 50 contracted their services to the highest bidder. Many at are the Viking heroes who gained glory fighting in the company of the Jomsvikings, but no trace of their mighty fortress remains today.

Three decades after Harald Bluetooth’s attempt to Christianize the Danes, a similar effort was made in Norway. Olaf Tryggvason, great-grandson of Harald Fairhair, accepted baptism in 994, as part of a settlement worked out with the English whom Olaf’s Vikings had been raiding unmercifully. (Another part of the deal was the payment by the English of 16,000 pounds of silver to the Vikings.)

Prior to 994 Olaf was one of the most active and colorful Vikings of the 10th century. His career foreshadowed in several respects. that of his most illustrious successor, the 11th-century Norwegian king Harald Sigurdsson. Among the many adventures attributed to Olaf is a raiding expedition on the English east coast in 991, culminating in a victorious battle against the Anglo-Saxons at Maldon (about 30 miles northeast of London).

Battle of Maldon

The entry for 991 in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle records: “In this year Olaf came with 93 ships to Folkestone and ravaged the neighborhood, went on to Sandwich and thence to Ipswich, and overran the whole area, and so to Maldon. And there Alderman Brythnoth and his fyrd came to meet him, and fought with him. And they killed the alderman and the battlefield was theirs….”

One of the Anglo-Saxon survivors of the battle against Olaf versified his recollections soon afterward. The portion of his narrative, The Battle of Maldon, which has survived provides us with one of the clearest contemporary expressions of the medieval Germanic warrior’s ethos, shared by Viking and Anglo-Saxon alike, in which the highest manly virtue is fidelity unto death. From the last stanzas of the poem, after Brythnoth has fallen and his men see the coming defeat, we read:

Then Bryhtwold spoke, shook ash appear, raised shield-board. In the bravest words this hoar companion handed on the charge:

“Courage shall grow keener, clearer the will, the heart fiercer, as our force faileth. Here our lord lies leveled in the dust, the man all marred. He shall mourn to the end who thinks to wend off from this war-play now. Though I am white with winters I will not away, for I think to lodge me alongside my dear one, lay me down by my lord’s right hand….”

The Viking Way to Immortality

The heroic ethos, the core of the Viking attitude toward life, of which the high value placed on fidelity is but one aspect, is probably stated best in the oft-repeated lines from Grettirssaga:

Cattle die, and kinsmen die,
And so one dies oneself.
One thing I know that never dies:
The fame of a dead man’s deeds.

To the Viking immortality was not gained by being baptized, going to Mass every Sunday, and being openhanded when the collection plate came around; the only way he knew to overcome the annihilation which awaits every man in the grave was to live his life in such a way that other men would remember him and esteem his memory. The individual consciousness must die, but the consciousness of the community, the tribe, and the race lives on; and, to the extent that the individual has entered that collective consciousness, he becomes immortal.

The Value of Action

This attitude toward life and death necessarily makes the individual take the long view in planning his actions. Honorable behavior becomes much more than a Dale Carnegie gimmick for getting along, admiration elicited from peers much more than a boost for one’s ego.

Action and achievement become necessary, for an uneventful life which goes unremarked ends at the grave; only through fame can a man go further — and the greater the fame, the more lasting the impact a man makes on the world, the further he can go.

The Last Viking

The coming of Christianity to the Viking world eventually meant the end of that world, but it did not change the Viking ethos immediately, as is evidenced by the life of a man who was certainly one of the most remarkable of all the Vikings, and the last of the truly great ones: Harald Sigurdsson, who, after he became king of Norway, was also known as Harald Hardraada (Hard Ruler) and Harald the Ruthless.

His deeds are the subject of one of the most fascinating of the Viking sagas (King Harald’s Saga), which we would be inclined to dismiss as an unusually imaginative work of heroic fiction, were it not solidly confirmed by the historical record. A few paragraphs on his life here will suffice to explain why Harald’s contemporary, the aforementioned Adam of Bremen, called him “the Thunderbolt of the North.”

Warrior-Poet

Nearly everything about Harald Sigurdsson was exceptional; for one thing, he grew to a height of seven feet, a blond giant of a man even by Viking standards. For another, he was not only the most ferocious of warriors, but he was a man of learning and culture, who composed poetry on the battlefield during lulls in the fighting.

With his strong right arm he carved a bloody path through a dozen countries, from the North Sea to the Mediterranean, and won himself a Rus princess, a fortune, and a throne. And he started young: in the year 1030, at the age of 15, he was severely wounded fighting alongside his half-brother, King Olaf the Stout, against the jarls of Norway.

Christian Terror

Olaf, like Denmark’s Harald Bluetooth before him, was deposed and chased out of his country after attempting to impose Christianity on his countrymen against their will. For two years Olaf had waged a campaign of Christian terror, burning the farms of all Norwegians who would not bow to the Church of Rome. Many of the stubborn traditionalists who fell into his hands he maimed or blinded.

Finally his subjects revolted, and he was forced to flee to Russia. When he returned with an army, including his half-brother Harald, in 1030 he was defeated and killed, and the wounded, 15-year-old Harald became a fugitive.

Olaf, despised by the Norwegians, was immediately made a saint by the Church, and today he is the patron saint of Norwegian Christians.

After Olaf’s defeat Harald made his way to Kiev, where his kinsman, King Yaroslav the Wise, ruled. There he fell in love with one of Yaroslav’s daughters, but the king would not have the penniless refugee as a son-in-law.

Varangian Guard

Harald fought for three years in the service of King Yaroslav, wreaking havoc on Yaroslav’s Slav neighbors and winning great prestige for himself. Then with a following of some 500 Rus Vikings he sailed to Constantinople, where he offered his services to the Byzantine emperor. Soon he was the commander of the emperor’s Varangian Guard, an elite military unit composed entirely of Vikings, the Schutzstaffel of its day.

For a decade Harald fought for the emperor throughout the Mediterranean and Middle Eastern world. He also fought for himself, however, for the booty which he sent back to Kiev from his various campaigns was enormous.

Harald’s adventures in the South are too numerous to recount here, but a single episode suggests a bit of the flavor: on one occasion while in Constantinople he made the mistake of seducing the wrong man’s wife. As a consequence he was arrested and tossed into the arena, unarmed, with a hungry lion. He fought the lion barehanded and won.

“Hard Ruler”

Harald sailed back to Kiev in 1044 and claimed his princess. In 1047 he claimed the Norwegian throne.

During his turbulent, 19-year reign, Harald continued Olaf’s campaign of forcing the Norwegians to accept Christianity, earning for himself the cognomen “Hardraada.” It was strictly policy, not superstition, which was behind this campaign, however; Harald never hesitated to gut a priest or burn a church when crossed. His aim was to break the power of the independent jarls and make his own authority absolute, and he succeeded.

Harald made his last mark on history in 1066. Upon the death of the Anglo-Saxon king, Edward the Confessor, in January of that year, Harald claimed the throne of England for himself — as did also William the Bastard, duke of Normandy. Accompanied by Earl Tostig, the disaffected brother of Edward’s English successor, Harold Godwinson, Harald, in his flagship Dragon sailed with a Viking fleet to England in September to assert his claim.

Death at Stamford Bridge

After Harald’s army had seized the town of York, King Harold Godwinson offered his brother Tostig half the kingdom in return for peace. But to Harald Sigurdsson he gave only his famous offer of “seven feet of English ground — or as much more as he is taller than other men.” With that, the English and the Vikings prepared for battle on September 25.

As the Viking army arranged itself around Harald’s banner Land-Waster, near Stamford Bridge, Harald thought of his Rus princess back in Norway, and he composed his last verse:

She told me once to carry
My head always high in battle
Where swords seek to shatter
The skulls of doomed warriors.

End of an Age

Harald, of course, lost his life that day at Stamford Bridge, but the damage he did to Harold Godwinson’s army undoubtedly was a major cause of the English defeat by the Normans at Senlac Hill a few days later. And with Harald Sigurdsson died the Viking Age.

The Vikings’ fighting spirit had been sapped by Christianity, but an even larger factor in their demise was their inability to keep in check their quarrels among themselves, combine their forces against outsiders, and thus match the growing power of kings in more unified lands than their own. Excessive individualism took its final toll.

Ever since the close of the Viking Age men in whose veins Viking blood still runs have dreamed of the freedom and the challenge and the glory of those bygone days. Perhaps nowhere is this better expressed than in a stanza from an anonymous Anglo-Saxon poem, The Wanderer:

What has become of the steed?
What has become of the warrior?
What has become of the seats of banquet?
Where are the joys of the hall?
Oh, for the bright cup!
Oh, for the mail-clad warrior!
Oh, for the glory of the prince!
How that time has passed away
And grown dark under the cover of night,
As if it had never been.
ILLUSTRATIONS

a) FURY OF THE NORTHMEN: This 1,100-year-old, carved Norwegian head from the Oseberg ship burial , excavated in 1904, evokes an image of the berserkr (literally, “one who wears a bearskin shirt”), the battle-intoxicated professional warrior who struck terror in the hearts of his opponents.

b) VIKING HALL at Trelleborg, Denmark. This wooden building, reconstructed by archaeologists, is one of a number of similar barracks-style buildings in a Viking military camp dating from about the year 1,000.

c) LANDSCAPE, like other environmental factors, shapes the human soul over the course of generations. The Lysefjord here, in southwestern Norway’s Rogaland, Illustrates both the scarcity of tillable land and the difficulty of overland travel with which the fjord-dwelling Vikings were forced to contend. It also suggests the adventurous, aggressive nature and the spiritual grandeur which were combined in the Viking soul.

d) THE VIKING SHIP, despite Its apparent simplicity, was an engineering marvel, the culmination of centuries of slow, careful evolution in design and technique. During the Viking Age It was far ahead of any other type of vessel in its ability to serve the Vikings’ purposes as both a coastal and river raider and a long-range ocean transport. In navigation as well as shipbuilding the Vikings surpassed all others. They were even able to determine the position of the sun in an overcast sky by using the light-polarizing properties of “sunstones,” cordierite pebbles found in Norway, and from this calculate their latitude. There is strong evidence, including a number of findings of Norse weapons and runic inscriptions in North America and Indian legends in Central and South America telling of White gods from beyond the eastern sea, which suggests that Vikings made many more transatlantic voyages of exploration to the New World than those of Lief Ericsson and Thorfinn Karlsefni.

BOXED TEXT

Semites and Vikings: No Love Lost

One would expect to find a spiritual difference between a race bred a hundred generations in the marketplace, where survival depended primarily on a glib tongue and an eye for a bargain, and a race shaped by the killing winters of the North, accustomed to combat and hardship. This difference — the difference between the Jewish spirit and the White spirit — is manifested in the world around us in a thousand ways.

Perhaps nowhere has the contrast between the natural, healthy, adventurous spirit of our race and the spirit of the Jew been more sharply drawn, however, than in a couple of recent issues of the student newspaper published on the Los Angeles campus of California State College. In the first issue was printed a poem by Dr. Peter Peel, who teaches history there. The second issue contained a response to the poem from a Jew at the same college.

Here is the poem, which was titled “Goetterdaemmerung”:

When Spring lightly touches
With hand green and golden
The mountains and fjords,
Then shouts the sea rover,
“A-viking! A-viking!”

The hammers are busy
On weapon and harness.
Then flashes the broad blade
In every sea hamlet.
The dragon ships, thirsty
For bounding blue water,
Leap down to the seashore.

And Olaf of Norway
And Erik of Gotland
And Thorwald the Mighty,
Whose grandsire was Wotan,
Stand fast on the poop deck
With golden hair streaming,
With spear brightly glinting,
With eye fierce and blazing,
Sail out on the swan’s bath —
The grey widow-maker —
For England or Iceland,
Byzantium, Vinland,
Far land or ancient
And ripe for the plunder,
The burning of roof-trees,
The seizing of women,
The tooting of treasure,
The flowing of red blood,
And wine for the victors.

Ah, whence fled those great days,
The days of our fathers,
The days of the valiant,
Of gods and of heroes,
Or fair maids and foul dwarfs,
And lindworms and dragons,
Of Beowulf, Dietrich,
Strong Harald, grim Hagen,
Wolfhart and Siegfried,
The greathearts, the mighty?

Yea loathsome today is
The seed of their strong loins —
The petty, the small, the clod and
the crawler.

The music has gone from the souls of our people.
The thunder has vanished away with Valhalla.
Now meekness and weakness
And womanly virtues
Have shackled, degraded
And shamefully softened
The sons of our fathers,
The sons of the mighty.

And now have we traded
The lightning of storm gods,
The arms of Valkyries,
The halls of Valhalla,
The kiss of wish maidens,
For wings and a nightshirt,
A harp and a halo,
A psalmbook and psalter?
Oh, no, my Lord Bishop!

Hark, grey Galilean,
The Wolf Age is coming,
The great fimbul winter,
When all sick things perish.

A few days after this poem appeared, the following letter headed “Bloodthirsty Sickness,” showed up on the editorial page of the student newspaper:

Editor:
The poem about the Vikings in the Nov. 25 issue by Peter H. Pee had real soul and beauty — the soul and the beauty of the bloodthirsty. Let it speak for itself:

“With golden hair streaming,
With spear brightly glinting,
With eye fierce and blazing …
And ripe for the plunder,
The burning of roof-trees,
The seizing of women,
The looting of treasure,
The flowing of red blood,
And wine for the victors.”

Murder! rape! loot, plunder blood and wine — the wanton destruction of the productive by bloodthirsty savages.

And what do these vicious predator-warriors denounce?

“Now meekness and weakness
And womanly virtues
Have shackled, degraded
And shamefully softened
The sons of our fathers,
The sons of the mighty.”

Yes, how could one be more degraded in the eyes of these savages than to become like those inferior creatures called women.

Beware you women, blacks, Latins and other lesser creatures. The Blonde Beast “With golden hair streaming” and warm, red blood dripping from his mighty sword shall rise again. Beware you weak and sick of all races for

“The Wolf Age is coming … When all sick things perish.”

Meanwhile, I wait for the day when this bloodthirsty sickness of the Blonde Beast shall perish forever from the face of the earth.
–R.A. Klein

e) THORFINN KARLSEFNI, American colonist. The statue, by Icelandic sculptor Einar Jonsson, is In Philadelphia.

f) POWER of the Christian Church lay in its organization. It was able to use the combined strength of those under its control to overcome, one by one, its disunited opponents and force them either to submit or be destroyed. The religion of the Northern peoples was a natural, personal part of their lives, and it was never used artificially to advance political goals, as was Christianity.

g) CHRISTIAN priests destroyed not only the sacred trees, groves, and altars of the Northern peoples; they also destroyed age-old traditions, values, an outlook, and a way of life which had developed organically during thousands of years — all to make way for their replacement by imported values and customs from the Middle East.

h) NORSE PAGANS were regarded as intemperate womanizers by their Christian neighbors to the south — and, indeed, the lusty Vikings prized women captives highly, making them as often the objects of their raids as gold and silver. But they generally treated their women well and protected them diligently: the invariable penalty for having intercourse with another Viking’s wife or for raping a virgin was death. Scandinavian women also enjoyed a higher social status and greater personal freedom than women in most areas of Christian Europe: a woman could obtain a divorce as easily as a man and could own and inherit property in her own name.

i) SHIPS played a central role, not only in Viking life, but also in death. This forested burial site, outlined in the shape of a Viking dragon ship with stones, lies near the west coast of the Baltic Island of Gotland. It is typical of thousands of other ship graves throughout the Scandinavian area.

j) AS CRAFTSMEN, working with gold, silver, bronze, and iron, the Vikings were second to none, as this helmet unearthed from a Viking grave In Sweden’s Uppland region Indicates.

k) “KING HAROLD IS KILLED,” says the embroidered Latin legend on this portion of the 11th-century Bayeux Tapestry, which displays 72 scenes dealing with the Norman conquest of England, up through Harold Godwinson’s death in battle at Hastings on October 14, 1066, and the rout of the English fyrd by Duke William’s army.

With the close of the Viking Age in the latter half of the 11th century, we left the prehistoric period, with all its pagan vigor, behind us in the previous installment and entered an era described more or less fully by contemporary written accounts. Our aim here, in accord with the purpose of this entire series, is to select from the wealth of historical material covering the events of the last 900 years that which is especially pertinent to racial developments, rather than to political, religious, economic, artistic, scientific, or other cultural aspects of life — keeping always in mind, of course, that, in the final analysis, race and culture are inseparable.

We have already noted, however briefly, the racial developments in Iberia through the l5th century (installment 19) and in Eastern Europe through the 17th century (installment 20). Most of what follows will be concerned with the North and the West of Europe: more specifically, with the people of that region and their expansion over the globe.

The Black Death

For five centuries after the abandonment of the settlements in North America, Europe staggered along under the burden of a number of problems: battling Moors, Turks, and Mongols on its southern and eastern frontiers and often well inside those frontiers; yielding up the last of its spiritual and mental freedom and settling into a straitjacket of superstition and orthodoxy, as the Christian Church tightened its grip on all of Europe; succumbing to the Black Death by the tens of millions, as this dread scourge swept over the land in the 14th century and killed every fourth European. In addition to these problems imported into Europe from Asia, the Europeans were no slouches at generating problems of their own, and territorial and dynastic warfare continued to take their toll throughout the Middle Ages.

White Productivity

By the beginning of the l5th century, however, the indomitable spirit of the White race was clearly making gains on several fronts: material, intellectual, and spiritual. On the first of these, European energy and inventiveness had kept up a slow but steady increase in productivity, both in agriculture and in the crafts, so that, despite the ravages of war and plague, the accumulation of wealth in all social strata had resulted in an average standard of living vastly higher than in any Asian land.

In the fifth decade of the century the German printer Johann Gutenberg of Mainz developed the process of printing with movable, metal type to the point that the mass production of books could be undertaken. For the first time in the life of the race the recording and general dissemination of man’s accumulated knowledge to all with the wit and the will to profit by it became a practical matter.

Explosion in Knowledge

And it was only in Europe that this wit and will were manifested. Some of the earlier developments in the printing craft had come from Asia — ink and paper, for example — but the explosion in knowledge resulting from Gutenberg’s work was confined almost entirely to our own European ancestors. By the end of the l5th century 1,000 new titles per year were being produced by Europe’s book printers. By 1815 the number had climbed to 20,000 per year.

In contrast, Turkish Constantinople, Asia’s wealthiest city, did not even bother to acquire its first printing press until 1726. By 1815 the grand total of all the books published in Constantinople in the preceding 89 years was only 63 titles, and the going rate was in the neighborhood of one new title per year.

Saxon Revenge

Even on the spiritual front there was progress. The Church, grown soft, corrupt, and overconfident in the centuries since the Saxons and the Vikings had been forced to the baptismal font, was spoiling for an upset by the end of the l5th century. It had laid the basis for its own downfall, and early in the following century its monopoly in matters of the spirit was dealt two lethal blows, first by Martin Luther in Germany (1517), and, a little over a decade later, by King Henry VIII in England. It is one of history’s sweetest ironies that Martin Luther was a Saxon and King Henry was the descendant of Norman Vikings.

Age of Exploration

With the burgeoning industry, the accumulating wealth, and the expanding mental horizons of the l5th century, the pressure to extend and expand trade was irresistible. From Amsterdam and Lisbon, Genoa and Venice, expeditions to open new trade routes between Europe and Asia were launched.

In 1492 a Genoese sailor, Christopher Columbus, financed by the Spanish monarchy, ran into the West Indies in an effort to reach Asia via a westward route. Five years later a Venetian, John Cabot, financed by the English monarchy, ran into Newfoundland attempting to do the same thing.

The English did not follow up Cabot’s discovery, but the Spanish, although disappointed that Cuba was not China, established colonies in the Greater Antilles and began exploring the adjacent mainland. By 1510 they had begun settling the isthmus of Panama. Over the next 40 years they built a flourishing Spanish Empire in the West Indies, Central America, and Peru.

Amerind Fate

The native Amerinds found by the Spaniards in the West Indies were, like those of the mainland, of Mongoloid derivation, being the descendants of Mongoloid peoples who had begun crossing the Bering Strait from Siberia to North America some 12,000 years ago and had then gradually propagated throughout the empty North and South American continents and the adjacent islands.

Since the Spaniards’ entire purpose in the New World was economic exploitation, not the propagation of their own race, they did not deliberately liquidate the native population. In some areas, however, that was the inadvertent effect of the Spanish conquest. The Indians were not constitutionally suited to the unremitting slave labor in the gold and silver mines and on the sugar plantations which was forced on them by their new masters, and they died like flies under the Spanish yoke.

An enormous toll was also taken by smallpox, a disease endemic among the Europeans but one to which the Amerinds, isolated as they had been for thousands of years, had no natural immunity. It virtually depopulated the Caribbean islands and then wreaked havoc among the mainland Indians. (The Indian revenge was syphilis, a New World disease entirely new to the Europeans — at least, in the new and virulent form in which it existed among the Amerinds.)

Beginning of the Black Tide

Because of the inadequacy of the Indians as a local labor force, the Spaniards almost immediately began importing Negro slaves from West Africa. The latter belong to a race ideally suited to the plantation labor of that era. The Blacks were first used in the West Indies, then on the Brazilian mainland. Approximately a million of them were imported in the period 1550-1650, and by the latter date they had completely replaced the Amerind natives as a slave labor force on the Caribbean islands.

Approximately 150,000 Spaniards and Portuguese had migrated to the New World by the middle of the 17th century, and natural increase had raised their number to about 400,000. They ruled over about 9,000,000 Indians — and a growing population of mestizos (Indian-White mixed breeds), Blacks, mulattos, and Indian-Black mixed breeds. Only on the island of Cuba was there anything approaching a truly White Spanish or Portuguese community.

Northerners Arrive

From the beginning of the l7th century, however, Northern Europeans — English, French, and Dutch — began seriously contesting the Iberians’ claims on the New World. By 1650 nearly 50,000 English (and a few thousand French and Dutch) immigrants were settled on Caribbean land wrested away from the Spaniards, and another 50,000 had landed in North America.

In sharp contrast to the Spanish and Portuguese colonists, the great bulk of the Northern Europeans came to the New World not to exploit non-White labor and make money, but to settle and work the land themselves, in all-White communities. Thus, colonialism acquired two quite distinct meanings in the l7th and l8th centuries: a strictly economic meaning, which applied to all the Southern European and some of the Northern European colonies; and a racial meaning, which applied almost exclusively to the colonies of the Northerners.

The tropical climate of the Caribbean did not treat the Northerners as well as it did the Southern Europeans, however, and about half of those who settled there were killed off by fever. After reaching a total of around 100,000 by 1700, most of them moved on to North America. The ones who remained switched to Iberian-style colonialism and began importing Blacks to work Caribbean sugar plantations in much greater numbers than the Spanish and Portuguese had.

The Pollution of the South

During the l8th century nearly three million Black slaves were brought into the Caribbean by the English. Another three million were imported by the Iberians, the great majority of them going to Brazil. This established an overwhelmingly non-White population base for the Central and South American area.

It was only in the 19th century that this bleak racial picture for Latin America began to change, and then only in the southernmost part of the region, the consequence of a large influx of new European immigrants (most of them from Southern Europe) into an area which had previously had a very sparse Amerind population and had not been considered suitable for economic exploitation with Black labor by the early Spanish and Portuguese colonists. Today the only countries in South America which are substantially White are Uruguay (nearly 100 per cent), Argentina (between 80 and 90 per cent), and Chile (approximately 50 per cent).

North-South Difference

The racial history of North America has been markedly different, for three reasons: first, the Amerind population density was much lower there when the Europeans arrived than in Central America and northern South America. The Amerinds achieved a substantial population density only where they had built centrally organized, agricultural societies. That was the case only in Central America, where the Aztec empire flourished, and in Peru, where the Incas ruled. Elsewhere the Amerind lifestyle was Mesolithic, with societies of hunters and gatherers spread very sparsely over the land.

Second, because the major economic justification for importing Black slaves into the New World was their suitability for plantation-style labor, the slaves were shipped predominantly to those areas best suited by climate for plantation crops, the principal one at that time being sugar. Thus, nearly all the Blacks were settled in the tropical regions of the New World; of the 9.5 million Negroes imported in the three centuries between 1550 and 1850, 4.25 million went to Brazil and other parts of northern South America, and 4.5 million went to the Caribbean and Central America. Another quarter of a million went to southern South America, and only half a million went to the southernmost colonies of North America.

Women and Plows

Third, as mentioned above, most of the Northern Europeans who came to the New World had quite different motives than did the Spanish and Portuguese. Most of the latter came only to make money, and relatively few brought their women with them; from the beginning miscegenation was common in the areas controlled by the Iberians.

The Northerners, on the other hand, came for the land and the opportunity for a new life on a new frontier. They brought their women and their plows with them, and for the most part, they did their own labor. They saw in the Indians no opportunity for economic exploitation, but only a danger to their families. Until missionaries began making Christians of the Indians and taking their side against the Whites, the latter just pushed them aside, took their land, and formed all-White communities of farmers, craftsmen, and tradesmen, as they had in Europe.

Only where the land and the climate were suitable for large-scale, plantation-style agriculture — that is, in the South — were Blacks brought into North America. Elsewhere, until the middle of the 19th century the entire influx was not only European, but Northern European. But for the efforts of the agribusiness entrepreneurs in the South — and the missionaries everywhere — North America, from the Canadian arctic to the Gulf of Mexico, would have become simply a racial extension of the Northern European heartland, in sharp contrast to the situation in Latin America.

Colonization Elsewhere

The l8th and 19th centuries were a time of Northern European colonization — in both senses of the word — in many places besides North America. The continent of Australia (and the islands comprising New Zealand) were discovered in the l7th century, but it was not until the end of the l8th century that European colonies were established: initially for economic exploitation in New Zealand and for dumping convicts in Australia. Only in the 19th century did racial colonization on a substantial scale begin in either territory.

In Australia the Europeans (nearly all British) encountered an extremely primitive native race — in some features even more primitive than the Negro — numbering around a quarter of a million. Disease and deliberate liquidation by the Europeans had reduced the Australian aborigines to about 60,000 by the beginning of this century. Even today, under protection from the Australian government, they have recovered to only 80,000 and remain largely isolated from the predominantly Northern European population of 13 million.

Major Threat

In New Zealand the non-White native population was less primitive, being of Polynesian stock. The European settlers reduced the number of these Polynesians (Maoris) from an initial 250,000 to about 40,000 at the beginning of this century. Since then a misguided White policy of deliberate coddling has resulted in a population explosion back up to the quarter-million mark. Today, among a White New Zealand population of only three million, the still-expanding Maori minority, mostly urbanized, poses a growing racial threat.

Vasco da Gama

The Indian subcontinent remained isolated from the White world for more than 30 centuries, for all practical purposes, following its conquest by the Aryans during the first half of the second millennium B.C. (see installment 11). Although Alexander the Great conquered northwestern India (Punjab) in the fourth century B.C., and a few Greek colonies established in the same area two centuries later lasted a few decades, it was not until after the Portuguese navigator Vasco da Garna reached India in 1498 by sailing around the southern tip of Africa that Europeans again began playing a significant role in the life of the subcontinent. By that time the Aryans had been completely submerged racially: only their language and elements of their religion and their social institutions survived among India’s 100 million non-White inhabitants.

England in India

First the Portuguese, then in succession the Spanish, the Dutch, the English, the Danes, the French, and the Austrians attempted to control the trade between Europe and India. In every case the motivation was strictly economic, not racial.

The outcome of the struggles between the European colonial powers in India was a clear win by the English. The Dutch retreated to Indonesia, and the Portuguese were obliged to remain content with the small enclave of Goa, which they kept until 1961. The rest were eventually shut out, and England ruled most of the subcontinent for two centuries.

Although the long English experience in India had a profound influence on the national psyche of England, it provided no net benefits to the White race. In the 19th century, when Englishmen were still profoundly race conscious — when every Englishman could remember how Robert Clive, with only 800 English soldiers, had routed an Indian army of 50,000 (battle of Plassey, Bengal, 1757) — it may not have seemed that the whole effort in India was pointless.

White Man’s Burden

One might have argued then that England’s colonial wars at least kept her in shape, that they were good for her soul. Rudyard Kipling’s poetry expressed this feeling most clearly, and what he wrote of the British soldier in Afghanistan could be applied as well to the British soldier anywhere else in the East:

When you’re wounded and left on Afghanistan’s plains,
An’ the women come out to cut up what remains,
Jest roll to your rifle an’ blow out your brains
An’ go to your Gawd like a soldier.

But the soldierly spirit of duty and uncomplaining self-sacrifice in the service of one’s kind eventually was perverted into a maudlin sense of obligation to the conquered scum of the earth. Again it was Kipling who said it best:

Take up the White Man’s burden —
Send forth the best ye breed —
Go, bind your sons to exile
To serve your captives’ need;
To wait in heavy harness
On fluttered folk and wild —
Your new-caught, sullen peoples,
Half-devil and half child….
Take up the White Man’s burden —
And reap his old reward:
The blame of those ye better,
The hate of those ye guard.

The hard lessons learned on the plains of Afghanistan were soon forgotten. Too many years of ease intervened, and moral rot set in. When the Indians became restless again after the Second World War, superstition and moral softness kept the English from dealing with them as Clive had. In the end, though colonialism in its day had made some Englishmen very rich, nothing was left except the superstition and the softness. And because of that superstition and softness, it is now the Indians and the other conquered races who are colonizing England without opposition from the English.

South Africa

The story of southern Africa is different, but equally instructive. Although the Portuguese first found it, they saw no economic opportunities there and did not colonize it.

It was, in the l5th century, an almost empty land, with only a few thousand yellow-skinned Bushmen eking out an existence there by hunting and gathering. The Negroes still had not emerged from their jungles, far to the north.

The Dutch established the first settlement in southern Africa in 1652, at the Cape of Good Hope, but its purpose was only to provide a way station for their maritime traffic between Europe and the East Indies. Five years later, however, the first Dutch farmers arrived and established farmsteads in the vicinity of the way station.

By 1671 Dutch colonists were expanding from the Cape Colony deep into the interior of southern Africa, driving herds of cattle and horses before them and building farms and villages as they went.

Mixed with the Dutch trekkers into the interior were an increasing number of German colonists. In 1688 a group of French Huguenot refugees from the anti-Protestant massacres of the Counter-Reformation arrived. From this group are descended the many South Africans of today bearing French names.

Fateful Decisions

Although southern Africa had become a de facto racial colony by the beginning of the l8th century, it was still a de jure economic colony, under the control of the Dutch East India company. The Company, whose sole interest was profit, saw itself losing control of what had been intended to be only a provisioning facility for its ships on the way to and from the East Indies. Consequently, in 1707 it made the fateful decision to stop providing assistance to European families who wanted to settle in its African colony.

In 1717, guided by the same profit-oriented reasoning, it decided to import Black slaves rather than bring more White craftsmen and artisans into the colony to meet a labor shortage.

Deadly Path

The consequence of these capitalist policies was that, when the Dutch East India Company finally disappeared from the scene in 1795, a century and a half after the arrival of the first settlers, there were still only 15,000 Whites in southern Africa. Furthermore, they had started down the deadly path of dependence on Black labor, rather than total White self-sufficiency.

The Dutch, German, and French settlers had by this time, however, become a homogeneous, Dutch-speaking group and developed strong ties to the land. Then a new element entered the African picture, when a British expeditionary force seized the administrative facilities of the Cape Colony from the Dutch in 1795, reflecting new political developments in Europe. In 1820, 5,000 British settlers arrived to strengthen the British hold on the colony.

Battle of Blood River

The new arrivals augmented the total White presence in southern Africa, but they shattered the cultural homogeneity which had existed previously. The loss of homogeneity had far-reaching, negative results, which are still felt today.

Meanwhile, late in the l8th century, the expanding White frontier in southern Africa encountered the first Black tribes which had been gradually migrating down from the north. Several decisive battles during the next few decades — most notably the great battle at Blood River, Natal, in 1838, in which the power of the Zulu tribe was broken (see “The Great Trek,” National Vanguard No. 59) — established White supremacy throughout southern Africa, but the conquered Blacks were not forced to leave the region.

Finally, after the discovery of gold and diamonds in the interior in 1870, a new flood of White (mostly British) settlers poured into southern Africa. With this last group, however, came a new and alien element: the Jews (who will be the subject of the next installment in this series).

Today the population of the Republic of South Africa is only 17 per cent White, and the Whites are on the defensive in the face of increasing hostility from the Black, Asian, mulatto, and Jewish minorities. The final end for the Whites there can be, at most, a matter of two decades away.

The hard lesson taught by the different results of the European colonization of North America, Latin America, Australia, New Zealand, India, and southern Africa is that the only type of colonization with lasting significance is racial colonization; and that racial colonization can succeed only when Whites are willing and able to clear the land of non-White inhabitants and keep it clear.

ILLUSTRATIONS

a) JOHANN GUTENBERG (1397-1468)

b) JOHN CABOT’S ship, Matthew, not much different from Columbus’ caravels, with a crew of 18, reached Newfoundland on June 24, 1497, resuming after nearly five centuries the racial mission to the New World begun by the Vikings.

c) HENRY VIII (1491-1547): His motives were not those of a religious reformer, but his establishment of the independence of the Church of England from that of Rome nevertheless helped mightily In the historical process of breaking the monolithic power of the medieval Church and, eventually, loosening its paralyzing grip on the mind of European man.

d) SOME COLONISTS CAME to America to make money, and agribusiness was their means. Sugarcane plantations, such as this one in Louisiana, were first, but they were followed by rice and cotton plantations, all of which owed their profitability to the large-scale use of Black slave labor. Little thought was given to the racial consequences of economic dependence on Black labor.

e) RACIALLY HEALTHY colonialism was the rule in North America outside the South. One-family farms depended only on the labor of their White owners. A growing native White population — not money in the bank for a few entrepreneurs — was their product.

f) AMERINDS, naturally, fought the White settlers in an effort to keep their land. Death by torture was the fate of Whites who fell into their hands alive. A favorite Indian method of killing a White captive was to stake him to the ground and build a fire on his stomach. In the long run this savage cruelty was probably a good thing, for it permitted the Whites to develop no illusions about peaceful coexistence; instead, they retaliated with a policy of extermination, which was the guaranty of racial purity for the future.

g) RUDYARD KIPLING (1865-1936)

h) MORAL BREAKDOWN in Britain after the Second World War gave Britain’s internal enemies an opportunity to open the floodgates of colored immigration from the former colonies of the collapsing Empire. Today more than two million non-Whites in Britain scream for their “rights” — and riot, hum, rape, and maim when they don’t get them fast enough.

i) THE CITIES OF BRAZIL, in which a White minority works in air-conditioned, steel-and-glass towers, are surrounded by thousands of acres of stinking favelas, in which a mestizo/mulatto majority breeds and breeds and breeds. Brazil’s population of 121 million is 60 per cent non-White, and it is doubling every 29 years.

The purpose of this series of historical articles is the development of a fuller knowledge and understanding of the White past in its readers, in the hope that these things will in turn lead to a stronger sense of White identity and White solidarity. Other races — Arabs, Mongols, Amerinds, Negroes, and the rest — have come into the story only to the extent that they have interacted with Whites and influenced the White destiny. One can turn to other sources for more information on them.

There is one alien race, however, which has exerted such a strong influence on the White destiny since Roman times — and especially during the past century — and which poses such an overwhelming threat to that destiny today that it deserves special treatment.

That race — which in the taxonomic sense is not a true race at all, but rather a racial-national-ethnic entity bound together partly by ties of blood; partly by religion; partly by common traditions, customs, and folkways; and wholly by a common sense of identity and perceived common interests — is, of course, the Jewish race.

Desert Nomads

In early Neolithic times the ancestors of the Jews shared the Arabian peninsula with their Semitic cousins, the Arabs, and presumably were indistinguishable from them. Desert nomads like the other Semites, they gained their sustenance from their herds of camels, sheep, and goats.

In the first half of the second millennium B.C. the first written references to the Jews appeared, the consequence of their contacts with literate peoples in Egypt and Mesopotamia during their roamings. The reviews were uniformly unfavorable.

In a research paper published this year, for example, the noted Egyptologist, Professor Hans Goedicke, chairman of the Department of Near Eastern Studies at Johns Hopkins University, associates an inscription on an Egyptian shrine of the goddess Pakht, dated to the l5th century B.C., with the departure of the Jews of Egypt which is fancifully related in the Old Testament’s Book of Exodus. The inscription reads, in part: “And when I allowed the abomination of the gods to depart, the earth swallowed their footsteps.”

Joseph and the Pharaoh

The Egyptians had reason enough to consider their departing Jewish guests “the abomination of the gods,” if there is any truth in the Biblical description of the Jews’ sojourn in Egypt. In the Book of Genesis the Jewish narrator boastfully tells of his fellow tribesmen’s takeover of the Egyptian economy and virtual enslavement of the Egyptian farmers and working people through the sort of financial chicanery which still seems to be their principal stock in trade today: When Joseph, the son of Israel (Jacob), became “ruler over all the land of Egypt” after gaining a corner on the local commodities market, he invited all his relatives in to “eat the fat of the land.” (Genesis 41-45)

But eventually, according to the first chapter of the Book of Exodus, there ascended the throne of Egypt a new pharaoh “who knew not Joseph” and who liberated the country from the grip of the Jewish moneylenders and grain brokers, eventually driving them from Egypt.

Most Contemptible Nation

So the Egyptians may have been “prejudiced” — but, then, so was everyone else. The great Roman historian Cornelius Tacitus (ca. 55-117 A.D.) wrote: “When the Assyrians, and after them the Medes and Persians, were masters of the Oriental world, the Jews, of all nations then held in subjection, were deemed the most contemptible.” (Histories, book 5, chapter 8)

It was not just the immemorial Jewish knack for turning a fast shekel which earned them the universal dislike of the ancient world; they had a number of other nasty habits as well. Prior to the introduction of Yahwism (i.e., Judaism) by Moses in the l5th century B.C., the Jewish religion consisted primarily of penis worship. Their orgiastic religious ceremonies involved such rituals as mass masturbation and buggery. An unbroken circle of naked Jewish priests dancing around a fire while each was engaged in anal intercourse with the Jew immediately in front of him must have been a disgusting spectacle indeed!

The Jewish Greeting

Moses was not able to break his fellow Jews of such deeply entrenched practices all at once, judging by the Bible’s accounts of various relapses and its numerous injunctions against the old rites. And, of course, ritual mutilation of the genitalia (circumcision) remains a central feature of Jewish religion to this day.

The translators of the Old Testament into European tongues did a great disservice to Christians by euphemizing the many passages dealing with the perverse sexual orientation of Jewish religion and society. To see only a single instance of this, note that the customary Jewish practice for swearing an oath, making a promise, or even greeting a friend was to seize the promisee or greetee by the penis while uttering the oath, promise, or salutation. This practice is only hinted at in the King James translation of Genesis, for example, where it is usually rendered discreetly as “putting the hand under the thigh” (Genesis 24:2; 47:29). In other places, such as I Chronicles 29:24, where the Hebrew version has all the leaders of the Jews pledging loyalty to Solomon by grasping the “mark of his circumcision,” the editors of the King James translation say merely that the Jews “submitted themselves unto Solomon the king.”

Perverse Patriarchs

The Talmud, by way of contrast, is quite explicit on all such matters — amazingly so, in fact, going on at great length and in excruciating detail about every form of sexual perversion imaginable, from bestiality to necrophilia. Unfortunately, very few Gentiles take the trouble to look into an unbowdlerized edition of the Talmud, and so miss the opportunity to gain valuable insight into the Jewish psyche. And, needless to say, the Christian clergy, with a vested interest in maintaining the good repute of the Biblical patriarchs, let slip no hint of these things to their deluded flocks.

To be fair to the Jews, it should be noted that sex-oriented religion was the rule among all the ancient Semites, and among some of the other peoples of the Middle East too. The Egyptians as well as the Jews customarily sodomized and castrated their prisoners of war, for example, and the Moslem peoples of today still practice ritual genital mutilation. But the ancient mental fixation on genital and excremental functions seems to have stayed with the Jews more than with anyone else, judging by the writings of modern Jews ranging from Sigmund Freud to Lenny Bruce, Philip Roth, and Norman Mailer.

Jewish Invasion of Palestine

The Jews first came into contact with Whites in the Middle East no later than the 12th century B.C., during the Jewish migration into Philistia (Palestine). The Philistines themselves, an Indo-European people, had invaded the area and conquered the native Canaanites only a few years before the Jews arrived (see the 11th installment in this series for a narrative of the Philistine-Jewish conflict).

In later centuries the Jews spread beyond Palestine into all the corners of the Mediterranean and Middle Eastern world, in part by simply following their mercantile instincts and in part as a consequence of their misfortunes in war. In the eighth century B.C. they were conquered by the Assyrians, who deported some 27,000 of them, and in the sixth century by the Babylonians, who hauled another batch of them away. It was during these forcible dispersions that the Jews’ view of themselves as a “chosen people,” infinitely superior to their conquerors, first stood them in good stead by helping them maintain their solidarity.

Yahweh Makes His Choice

We may suspect, from reading the account in the Book of Genesis of Joseph’s behavior in Egypt, that even then the Jews held this view. According to tradition, however, it was after they had been expelled from Egypt that they were “chosen” to be a “holy people” by the volcano spirit Yahweh (Jehovah), one of the many Semitic deities in the desert through which they passed in their flight from the pharaoh’s troops. If they would take Yahweh as their god and obey his commandments, they were promised, then in turn Yahweh would give them the world and all the peoples in it to do with as they wished.

This was the message which a clever huckster named Moses, taking advantage of his fellow Jews’ superstitious awe of an erupting volcano in the Sinai desert, brought to them more than three thousand years ago. Moses braved the trumpeting jets of steam and hot pumice, the rising column of volcanic dust, and the lightning flashing about the summit to climb the volcano and commune with its “god.” When he climbed back down again Moses told the mightily impressed Semites that he had struck a deal with the volcano spirit: obey its commands — issued through Moses and his brother Aaron — and the god of the volcano would use its awesome power in their behalf. “Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: for all the earth is mine…. (Exodus 19:5)

New Mouthpiece, Same Message

Peculiar, indeed, but this “covenant, ” entered into at the base of an erupting volcano, is the basis on which the entire Old Testament rests. It is repeated many times, e.g., in Deuteronomy (7:6): “The Lord thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto himself, above all people that are upon the face of the earth.”

Seven hundred years later, in the eighth century B.C., the Jewish “prophet” Isaiah, also pretending to be the mouthpiece of the volcanic spirit, since become the tribal god of the Israelites, delivered essentially the same message to the “chosen people”: “Arise, shine; for thy light is come…. And the Gentiles shall come to thy light, and kings to the brightness of thy rising…. And the sons of strangers shall build up thy walls, and their kings shall minister unto thee…. Therefore thy gates shall be open continually … that men may bring unto thee the forces of the Gentiles, and that their kings may be brought. For the nation and kingdom that will not serve thee shall perish: yea, those nations shall be utterly wasted.

“…Ye shall eat the riches of the Gentiles, and in their glory shall ye boast yourselves.” (Isaiah 60,61)

Message of the Mezuza

A heady message for a flea-bitten tribe of itinerant camel traders and money changers, but it went straight to their covetous hearts. Even today tradition-minded Jews, religious or not, like to recite a slightly different version of the same “divine promise” when they gather for their festivals and holidays: “Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen (Gentiles) for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession.” (Psalms 2:8)

On the doorways to their houses they fasten an inconspicuous bit of parchment — a mezuza — covered with Hebrew script, spelling out a portion of the tribal covenant made with the volcano spirit back in the time of Moses. It reminds them that if they hold up their side of the bargain, then their god will “drive out all these nations from before you, and ye shall possess greater nations and mightier than yourselves. Every place whereon the soles of your feet shall tread shall be yours…. There shall no man be able to stand before you, for the Lord your God shall lay the fear of you and the dread of you upon all the land that ye shall tread upon, as he hath said unto you.” (Deuteronomy 11:23-25)

Vainglorious stuff, indeed, but the Jews have believed it with all their hearts for 34 centuries. It has made them a curse and a pestilence to every nation upon which they have descended, and it has elicited a vigorous reaction against them more than once. But it is what holds them together, gives them their push, and seems to make them think that they can get away with anything.

Esther Turns a Trick

The sort of resentment and hostility which the Jews generate among their Gentile hosts by behavior based on the deep-seated belief that the world is their oyster is illustrated well by the Old Testament tale of Esther. Set in the fifth century B.C., it suggests that the Persians of that era had already had their fill of Jewish arrogance and pushiness and wanted badly to get rid of their Semitic guests.

The Jewish response to Persian anti-Semitism was to slip a Jewish prostitute into the palace of the Persian king, concealing her Jewishness until she had used her bedroom skills to win the king’s favor and turn him against his own nobles. The ensuing slaughter of 75,000 Persian noblemen described in the Book of Esther is probably a figment of the Jewish imagination, but it is nevertheless still celebrated with glee and gloating, more than 2,400 years after the event, by Jews around the world in their annual Purim festival.

Treacherous Friendship

Unfortunately, later massacres instigated or perpetrated by the Jews against their non-Jewish hosts in response to anti-Semitism were all too real. The great English historian Edward Gibbon describes some of these which took place in the first and second centuries A.D.:

From the reign of Nero (54-68) to that of Antoninus Pius (138-161) the Jews discovered a fierce impatience of the dominion of Rome, which repeatedly broke out in the most furious massacres and insurrections. Humanity is shocked at the recital of the horrid cruelties which they committed in the cities of Egypt, of Cyprus, and of Cyrene, where they dwelt in treacherous friendship with the unsuspecting natives, and we are tempted to applaud the severe retaliation which was exercised by the arms of the legions against a race of fanatics, whose dire and credulous superstition seemed to render them the implacable enemies not only of the Roman government but of human kind.

… In Cyrene they massacred 220, 000 Greeks; in Cyprus 240,000, in Egypt a very great multitude. Many of these unhappy victims were sawn asunder, according to a precedent to which David had given the sanction of his example. The victorious Jews devoured the flesh, licked up the blood, and twisted the entrails like a girdle round their bodies. (History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter XVI)

Laundered History

Actually, very little of humanity is shocked at the recital of these Jewish atrocities today, for the simple reason that the carefully laundered “approved” textbooks used in the schools omit any mention of them. Instead, humanity is treated to one television “documentary” after another, from “Holocaust” to “Masada,” in which the blameless, longsuffering Jews are “persecuted” by their enemies.

When one looks at all of Jewish history from the time of the Egyptian sojourn to the present, the outstanding feature which emerges is its endless series of cycles, each consisting of a period of increasingly arrogant and blatant depredations by the Jews against their hosts, followed by a period of reaction, in which either the exasperated Gentiles slaughter, drive out, and otherwise “persecute” the Jewish offenders; or the Jews manage to get the drop on their hosts instead and arrange a slaughter of Gentiles; or both.

Dual Existence

Indeed, this feature of Jewish history is not only outstanding, it is essential: without it the Jews would have ceased to exist by Roman times, at the latest. For the Jews are a unique people, the only race which has deliberately chosen a dual mode of national existence, dispersed among the Gentile nations from which they suck their sustenance and at the same time fiercely loyal to their center in Zion, even during the long periods of their history when Zion was only an idea instead of a sovereign political entity.

Without the diaspora the concrete Zion — i.e., the state of Israel — could not exist; and without the abstract Zion — i.e., the concept of the Jews as a united and exclusive whole, divinely ordained to own and rule the world — the diaspora could not exist.

Power of the Diaspora

Israel would not survive a year, were it not for the flow of “reparations” payments from West Germany, the billions of dollars in economic and military aid from the United States, and, most of all, the threat of armed retaliation by the United States against any Arab nation which actually makes a serious effort to dispossess the Jews of their stolen Arab territory.

It is certainly not love for the Jews on the part of the masses of Germans and Americans which maintains this support for Israel. It is instead a combination of two things: first, the enormous financial and political power of the Jews of the United States, the latter exercised primarily through the dominant Jewish position in the controlled news media; and second, the influence of a relatively small but vocal and well-organized minority of Jew-worshipping Christian fundamentalists, who accept at face value the Jews’ claim to be the divinely ordained rulers of the world.

Barrier of Hatred

And the diaspora would survive little more than a generation, were it not for the Jewish consciousness, the concept of Zion. It is this alone which keeps the dispersed Jews from becoming assimilated by their Gentile hosts, for the Jewish consciousness inevitably raises a barrier of mutual hatred between Jews and Gentiles.

How can a Jew of the diaspora, who is taught from the cradle that he belongs to a “chosen race,” do other than despise the goyim around him, who are not even considered human beings by his religious teachers? How can he do other than hate them for holding back him and his fellow Jews from the world dominion which he believes belongs rightfully to the Jewish nation? And how can Gentiles fail to sense this contempt and hatred and respond in kind?

Action and Reaction

In recapitulation, the dynamic of the interaction between Jew and Gentile is this: as soon as the Jews have infiltrated a Gentile land in sufficient numbers so that their organized efforts can be effective, they begin exploiting and manipulating. The more wealth and power they accumulate, the more brazenly and forcefully they attempt to accumulate still more, justifying themselves all the while with the reminder that Yahweh has promised it all to them anyway.

Any tendency to empathize or identify with their hosts is kept in check by a nonstop recitation of all the past wrongs the Gentile world has done them. Even before anti-Semitism exists in reality, it exists in the Jewish imagination: the Gentiles hate them, they believe, and so they must stick together for self-protection.

Sure enough, before the Jews’ solidarity has a chance to erode appreciably, the Gentiles are hating them. The Gentiles react to the Jews mildly at first and then with more and more resentment and energy as the Jewish depredations continue. It is this action-reaction combination, the hatred and counter-hatred, which keeps the Jews from being absorbed into the host nation.

Exaggerated Losses

Finally there is an explosion, and the most nimble Jews flee to begin the cycle over again in another Gentile land, while the slow ones remain to suffer the pent-up fury of their outraged hosts. The memory of this explosion is assiduously cultivated by the surviving Jews and becomes one more grudge they bear against the Gentile world. They still remember and celebrate the explosions of the Egyptians, the Persians, the Romans, and two dozen other Gentile peoples over the last 35 centuries or so, exaggerating their losses and embellishing the details every time in order to make the memories more poignant, while the Gentiles in each case forget within a generation or two.

These periodic outbursts against the Jews have actually served them doubly well: not only have they been invaluable in maintaining the Jewish consciousness and preventing assimilation, but they have also proved marvelously eugenic by regularly weeding out from the Jewish stock the least fit individuals. Jewish leaders, it should be noted, are thoroughly aware of the details of this dynamic. They fully recognize the necessity of maintaining the barrier of hatred between their own people and the rest of the world, just as they understand the value of an occasional explosion to freshen the hatred when assimilation becomes troublesome.

The blame for the decay of the Roman world has often been placed on the Jews. Indeed, some especially brazen Jewish writers have proudly accepted that blame and have even boasted that Christianity was invented deliberately by zealous Jews to further subvert and weaken the Roman Empire.

The truth of the matter, however, is that, so long as Roman society was healthy and the Roman spirit strong and sound, both were immune to Jewish malice and Jewish scheming. It was only after Rome was no longer Roman that the Jews were able to work their evil there.

After the old virtues had already been largely abandoned and the blood of the Romans polluted by that of a dozen races, the Jews, of course, did everything to hasten the process of dissolution. They swarmed over decaying Rome like maggots in a putrefying corpse, and from there they began their infiltration of the rest of Europe.

Tribal Connections

Every Roman army from the time of Julius Caesar was followed by a contingent of Jewish slave dealers, ready to purchase prisoners of war for gold on the spot after each successful battle or siege. No sooner were Gaul or Britain or the German lands in the west pacified by Rome’s legions than Jews appeared in the conquered region to set up shop and get an early edge on any potential competitors for control of the local commerce.

The great advantage that a Jew had in this regard was that he was never merely an individual entrepreneur: he was an agent of a tribe of entrepreneurs. A Roman might depend on family connections or political alliances to further his commercial enterprises, but he was nearly always outclassed in this regard by a Jewish competitor, whose connections extended literally to every other Jew in the Empire, and beyond.

Inevitable Friction

Thus, the Jews established themselves in every part of Europe over which Rome claimed dominion, and, wherever they could, they remained after that dominion ended. Except in the Mediterranean provinces and in Rome itself, however, their numbers remained relatively small at first.

Despising farming and all other manual activity, they engaged almost exclusively in trade and finance. Thus, their presence was confined entirely to the towns, and even a relatively large commercial center of 10 or 15 thousand inhabitants might have no more than a few dozen Jews.

Even their small numbers did not prevent nearly continuous friction between them and their Gentile neighbors, however. As Europe’s population, commerce, industry, and wealth grew during the Middle Ages, so did the numbers of Jews everywhere and with them the inevitable friction.

Wholesale Expulsions

Everyone has heard of the wholesale expulsions of Jews which occurred in virtually every country of Europe during the Middle Ages: from England in 1290, from Germany in 1298, from France in 1306, from Lithuania in 1395, from Austria in 1421, from Spain in 1492, from Portugal in 1497, and so on. What many do not realize, however, is that the conflict between Jew and Gentile was not confined to these major upheavals on a national scale. Hardly a year passed in which the Jews were not massacred or expelled from some town or province by an exasperated citizenry. The national expulsions merely climaxed in each case a rising popular discontent punctuated by numerous local disturbances.

Much has been made of the religious bigotry of the medieval Church in explaining the unpopularity of the Jews. Indeed, religion often did flavor Gentile reactions against the Jews. When the Jews were driven out of Clermont (modern Clermont-Ferrand, known to its Roman founders as Augustonemetum) in Frankish Gaul in 576 by an enraged mob, for example, the proximate excuse was that a Jew, in order to show his contempt for Christians, had thrown rancid oil on an Easter parade as it wound through the Jewish quarter of the town.

Predictable Outrage

Likewise, on a separate occasion, when the Jews of a Frankish town were massacred by the Gentile populace, the reason given by the chroniclers was that, after a Jewish criminal had been handed over by the Gentile authorities to the Jewish community for punishment, in accord with the custom of the times, the Jews arrogantly overreached themselves by reenacting the crucifixion of Jesus: they scourged the man and put a crown of thorns on his head before nailing him to a cross. The Gentile Christians were predictably outraged and reacted accordingly.

Sometimes clerics played a role in inciting such actions against the Jews, but far more often the people acted spontaneously, and religion was generally only a cover for other motives, which stemmed much more from the economic activity of the Jews than from their contempt for Christianity.

Bred to Business

The Jews were more successful at commerce than the Gentiles were, partly because the former collaborated with one another in virtually every transaction, while the latter usually did not. Thus, a Jewish wholesaler always had a lower price for a Jewish retailer than for a Gentile retailer, while a Gentile wholesaler merely tried to get the best price he could from all comers, Jew or Gentile.

In addition to the benefits of racial solidarity, the Jews were probably better businessmen, on the average, than their Gentile competitors. The Jews had been bred to a mercantile life for a hundred generations. The result was that all the business — and all the money — of any nation with a Jewish minority tended to gravitate into the hands of the Jews. The more capital they accumulated, the greater was their advantage, and the easier it was to accumulate still more.

Instability of Capitalism

Of course, the Jews were willing to share their wealth with their Gentile hosts — for a price. They would gladly lend money to a peasant, in return for a share of his next crop or a lien on his land; and to a prince, in return for a portion of the spoils of his next war. Eventually, half the citizens of the nation were hopelessly in debt to the Jews.

Such a state of affairs was inherently unstable, and periodic explosions were inevitable. Time after time princes and people alike found that the best way out of an increasingly tight financial squeeze was a general burning of the Jews’. books of account — and of the Jews too, if they did not get out of the country fast enough. The antipathy which already existed between Jews and Gentiles because of the Jews’ general demeanor made this solution especially attractive, as did the religious intolerance of the times.

Fatal Fascination

One would think that one episode of this sort in any country would be enough for the Jews, and that they would thenceforth stay away from a place where they were so manifestly unwelcome. But they could not. Any country in Europe temporarily without a Jewish minority to soak up the country’s money like a sponge had an irresistible attraction for them. Before the embers of the last general Jew-burning were cool, other Jews were quietly sneaking in to take the place of the ones who had been slaughtered.

The great 19th-century Russian writer Nikolai Gogol embodied this extraordinary Jewish peculiarity in a character in his Taras Bulba, the story of a Cossack chieftain. The character, Yankel, is one of a group of Jewish, merchants and their dependents who have attached themselves to the Cossacks’ camp. One day the Cossacks rid themselves of the Jewish pests by throwing them all in the Dnieper and drowning them — all except Yankel, who hides beneath a wagon.

While the massacre is taking place, Yankel trembles in fear of being discovered. As soon as it is over and things have quieted down again, he creeps from his hiding place. The reader expects that Yankel will then waste no time putting as much distance between himself and the Cossacks as possible. But, no; Yankel instead rushes to set up a stall and begin selling gunpowder and trinkets to the men who have just drowned his kinsmen. His eagerness to resume business seems doubled by the fact that now he has no competitors.

Advice and Bribes

The Jews were often able to ameliorate their situations greatly during the Middle Ages by establishing special relationships with Gentile rulers. They served as financial advisers and tax collectors for the princes of the realm and of the Church, always ready with rich bribes to secure the protection of their patrons when the hard-pressed common folk began agitating against them. They made themselves so useful to some rulers, in fact, that they were favored above Christian subjects in the laws and decrees of those rulers.

The Frankish emperor Charlemagne was one who was notorious for the favors and privileges he bestowed on the Jews, and his successor followed his example. It is especially instructive to read what the noted Jewish historian Heinrich Graetz has to say on this matter in his encyclopedic work, History of the Jews (v. III, ch.6 of the 1894 English edition, issued by the Jewish Publication Society of America):

Power Over the Christians

The successor of Charles the Great, the generous but weak Louis [ruled 814-840], in spite of his religious inclination, which obtained for him the name of “the Pious,” showed extraordinary favor to the Jews. He took them under his special protection…. They enjoyed the right of settling in any part of the kingdom. In spite of numerous decrees to the contrary, they were not only allowed to employ Christian workmen, but they might even import slaves. The clergy were forbidden to baptize the slaves of Jews in order to enable them to regain their freedom. Out of regard for them the market day was changed from the Sabbath day to Sunday. The Jews were freed from the punishment of scourging [which was inflicted on Gentiles], and had the jurisdiction over Jewish offenders in their own hands…. They were allowed to carry on their trades without let or hindrance, but they had to pay a tax to the [emperor’s] treasury, and to render account periodically of their income. Jews also farmed the taxes, and obtained through this privilege a certain power over the Christians, although this was distinctly contrary to the provisions of canonic law.

An officer (Magister Judaeorum) was appointed whose duty it was to watch over the rights of the Jews, and not permit them to be encroached upon…. One is almost tempted to believe that the remarkable favor shown to the Jews by the pious emperor was mainly due to commercial motives. The international commerce which Charlemagne had established, and which the counselors of Louis wished to develop, was mostly in the hands of Jews, because they could more easily enter into commercial relations with their brethren in other lands as they were not hampered by military service. [The Jews and the clergy were exempted from military duty.]

Admired for Cleverness

Graetz goes on to boast that Jews were feted in Louis’s court, were admired for their cleverness and wealth by all his courtiers, and, in general, exerted more influence on the styles and mores of European society than in any other era before the l7th century, when the Puritans introduced a new period of Jew-worship.

The medieval Church was at least as much at fault as the royalty in showing favor to the Jews. There were exceptions to the rule, however: several Church leaders heroically stood up for the common people and condemned the Jews for exploiting them. One of these was Agobard, a ninth-century bishop of Lyons. In Graetz’s words:

A Good Christian

The female slave of a respected Jew of Lyons ran away from her master, and to regain her freedom she allowed herself to be baptized (about 827). The Jews, who saw in this act an encroachment on their chartered rights and on their property, demanded the surrender of the runaway slave. On Agobard’s refusal to grant this, the Jews turned to Eberard, the Magister Judaeorum, who threatened to punish the bishop if he persisted in his refusal to restore her to her master.

This was the beginning of a contest between Agobard and the Jews which lasted for several years…. Agobard delivered anti-Jewish speeches, and urged his parishioners to break off all intercourse with the Jews, to do no business with them, and to decline entering their service. Fortunately, their patrons at court were active on their behalf, and did their best to frustrate the designs of the fanatic priest. As soon as they were informed of his action they obtained letters of protection (indiculi) from the emperor….

A letter was likewise sent to the bishop commanding him, under a severe penalty, to discontinue his anti-Jewish sermons. Another letter was sent to the governor of the Lyons district, bidding him render the Jews all assistance (828). Agobard took no notice of these letters…. The Jew-hater Agobard did not rest in his efforts against the Jews.

Consistent Overreachers

Agobard lost his struggle with Louis, but his efforts had a long-range effect on the conscience of many of his fellow Franks. Despite the enormous financial power of the Jews and the protection their bribes bought them, they were continually overreaching themselves: whenever they were given a little rope, they eventually managed to hang themselves. No matter how much favor kings, emperors, or princes of the Church bestowed on them, the unrest their usury created among the peasants and the Gentile tradesmen forced the rulers to slap them down again and again.

The hatred between Jews and Gentiles was so intense by the 12th century that virtually every European country was obliged to separate the Jews from the rest of the populace. For their own protection the Jews retreated into walled ghettos, where they were safe from the fury of the Gentiles, except in cases of the most extreme unrest.

And for the protection of the Gentiles, Jews were obliged to wear distinctive clothing. After the Church’s Lateran Council of 1215, an edict forbade any Jew to venture out of the ghetto without a yellow ring (“Jew badge”) sewn on his outer garment, so that every Gentile he met could beware him.

But these measures proved insufficient, for they failed to deal with the fundamental problem: so long as the Jews remained Jews, there could be no peace between them and any other people.

Edward the Great

In England, for example, throughout the 13th century there were outbreaks of civil disorder, as the debt-laden citizens sporadically lashed out at their Jewish oppressors. Another prominent Jewish historian, Abram Sachar, in his A History of the Jews (Knopf, 1965), tells what happened next:

At last, with the accession of Edward I, came the end. Edward was one of the most popular figures in English history. Tall, fair, amiable, an able soldier, a good administrator, he was the idol of his people. But he was filled with prejudices, and hated foreigners and foreign ways. His Statute of Judaism, in 1275, might have been modeled on the restrictive legislation of his contemporary, St. Louis of France. He forbade all usury and closed the most important means of livelihood that remained to the Jews. Farming, commerce, and handicrafts were specifically allowed, but it was exceedingly difficult to pursue those occupations.

England’s Golden Age

Difficult indeed, compared to effortlessly raking in capital gains! Did Edward really expect the Jews in England to abandon their gilded countinghouses and grub about in the soil for cabbages and turnips, or engage in some other backbreaking livelihood like mere goyim? God’s Chosen People should work for a living?

Edward should have known better. Fifteen years later, having finally reached the conclusion that the Jews were incorrigible, he condemned them as parasites and mischief-makers and ordered them all out of the country. They were not allowed back in until Cromwell’s Puritans gained the upper hand 400 years later. Meanwhile, England enjoyed an unprecedented Golden Age of progress and prosperity without a Jew in the land.

Unfortunately, the other monarchs of Europe, who one after another found themselves compelled to follow Edward’s example, were not able to provide the same long-term benefits to their countries; in nearly every case the Jews managed to bribe their way back in within a few years.

Racial Pollution

Throughout the Middle Ages the Jews of Europe mingled their Semitic blood with that of the Whites on whom they lived, despite absolute bans everywhere on marriage between Christian and Jew. The Jews absorbed White blood through their notorious fondness for White slave girls, whose offspring were often raised as Jews. To a much greater extent the Whites absorbed Jewish blood, through the folly, encouraged by the Church, of regarding any baptized Jew as White. After the 12th century, fortunately, the mingling was minimized by the confinement of the Jews to ghettos.

The greatest influence on the Jewish racial constitution during the Middle Ages was not White intermixture, however. The conversion of the Khazars, a Hunnic tribe from Central Asia, to Judaism in the eighth century changed substantially the racial basis of the Jewish populations of Eastern Europe.

Sviatoslav the Great

As related in the 20th installment in this series, the Khazar political and military power was smashed in the 10th century by Sviatoslav the Great and his Rus warriors, but the Khazars were merely dispersed rather than being annihilated. Today the Jews of Europe, and those who trace their ancestry to Europe, owe much more of their genetic heritage to the Khazars than they do to the Semites who emerged from the Arabian desert at the dawn of history.

The Khazars themselves, however, mixed substantially with their Slav subjects in the centuries prior to their dispersal by Sviatoslav, and they continued to mix with other European peoples until they were ghettoized in the 12th century.

Today the Jews divide themselves into two major categories, the Sephardim and the Ashkenazim. The former are those of substantially Semitic heritage, whose ancestors have lived primarily in North Africa, the Middle East, and the Mediterranean regions of Europe. The latter are those from Central and Eastern Europe, who consequently have relatively more Khazar and relatively less Semite in them.

ILLUSTRATIONS

a) JEWS WERE SUSPECTED throughout the Middle Ages of stealing Gentile children and ritually sacrificing them, as in this Polish carving which shows Jews sucking the blood of a victim. The Old Testament indicates that human sacrifice was common among the ancient Jews, but whether the practice continued into the Middle Ages is a matter for debate. Jews deny it, calling such accusations “blood libel,” but there is fairly good evidence of occasional ritual murders of Gentile children by Jews as late as the 19th century, and some of the horrid atrocities perpetrated by Jews on Gentile victims in Russia after the Bolshevik Revolution and in Europe after the Second World War seem to have been ritual in nature.

b) JEWISH TYPE In facial features has persisted through the ages. Jewish Hollywood actress Barbra Streisand (left) could be a sister to the Jewish merchant portrayed by this 1,800-year-old term cotta head unearthed in Slovakia, which saw its first Jews after the area (known as Pannonia then) was conquered by Rome.

c) SOVIET COMMUNIST leaders (from left, above) Litvinoff, Kagan, Maiski, Levine, and Trotsky were all Ashkenazic Jews (i.e., substantial Khazar admixture); while Disraeli left, below) was Sephardic (i.e., substantially Semitic) — yet, notice the similarities in their features! Apparently there was a good bit of gene exchange between Sephardim and Ashkenazim during 800 years of ghetto existence. Many other racial elements have been added to the Jewish stock over the ages, however, as evidenced by the distinctly Armenoid Jew from northwestern Iran (second from left, below) and the distinctly Negroid Jew from Poland (third from left, below). U.S. Jew Bernard Baruch (below, right) could almost pass for White, and the same is true of many others. Most Jews can be recognized on sight by a trained observer, however, and Jews are nearly always able to recognize one another.

d) PERFECT JEWISH FACE: This New York model has it. Eyes, nose, mouth may be difficult to characterize individually as “Jewish,” but the combination is unmistakable.

e) ORTHODOX JEWS’ distinctive garb and tonsorial style serves to maintain their solidarity and prevent assimilation. In the United States such groups are seldom seen outside of New York City, but earlier in this century they were a common sight throughout Central and Eastern Europe.

This installment continues the history of the interaction of the Jews with the European peoples, begun in the previous installment, and carries it from the Middle Ages into the modern era.

The salient characteristic of the Middle Ages was order. The feudal society of the early Middle Ages (from ca. 700 until ca. 1200 was a highly structured society: not only did every man have his place and every place its man, but the relationship of each man to every other was strictly defined. From the lord of the manor down to the village idiot, every person was bound to others by mutual responsibilities and obligations.

Craft and Trade Guilds

In the later Middle Ages, when feudalism gave way to newer forms after the rise of town life and the emergence of centralized states, the order remained, and so did the responsibilities and obligations. The details changed, of course, but in the towns craft and trade guilds provided as comprehensive a framework, within which a man earned his livelihood and made his contribution to the economic and industrial life of the community, as the feudal framework which had served the same purpose earlier on the manor.

That is, in 13th century Europe a man did not ordinarily decide at the age of 20 or 25 that he would try his hand at sword making, say, or importing and selling spices, and then simply hang out a shingle with the announcement “Fine Swords” or “Fine Spices,” perhaps deciding after two or three years to switch over to horse breeding or musical instrument repairing. If a man of 25 were the proprietor of a sword-making establishment, it was because at the age of 12 or so he had been apprenticed to a master sword maker and, after years of learning the trade, had passed a rigorous test of his skills and been formally admitted to the armorer’s guild.

Aid and Discipline

Thereafter, if he needed an apprentice or an assistant in his own shop, or backing in a legal dispute, or advice in dealing with a foreign supplier of raw materials, he turned to his guild for help. His guild provided not only aid, but also discipline: it regulated the sword-making industry, setting prices and standards of quality, restricting competition by limiting the number of new members allowed into the guild each year, fining or expelling members for unethical business practices or shoddy workmanship.

What was true of sword making was also true of nearly every other profession in medieval Europe. People with similar interests united in order to promote those interests. But beyond that, everyone was united, more or less, in order to promote the common interest. The master craftsmen who governed the armorer’s guild, just as the leaders of the other sectors of the community, understood the simple truth that they could not promote their own interests, in the long run, unless they also promoted the interests of the whole community.

Corporate Society

This eternal truth, like the social ideal based on it, was not a discovery of the Middle Ages, of course. Its recognition is as old as human society — older, in fact — but in the Middle Ages actual practice came a bit closer to the ideal than in many other periods of history. The corporate society which flourished in Western Europe from the mid-12th century until its destruction by the rise of finance capitalism in the l8th century was able to approach the ideal primarily because it was a substantially homogeneous society, and its institutions had developed organically over a very long period of time.

Both in theory and in practice corporatism had its flaws, the principal one being that it gained stability at the expense of innovation: medieval society was extraordinarily conservative, and technical progress came at a somewhat slower pace than it might have in a less-regulated society. On the other hand, a reasonable degree of stability is always a prerequisite for continuing progress, and the medieval compromise may not have been so bad after all.

Freedom and Order

Insofar as personal freedom was concerned, the socially irresponsible “do your own thing” attitude definitely was not so common as it is today, but neither was there a lack of opportunities for the adventurous element among the population to give expression to its urges. It should be remembered that the most common theme of the folk tales which had their origin in the Middle Ages — exemplified in the Grimm brothers’ collection — was that of the young man setting out alone into the world to make his fortune. Certainly, there was more personal freedom, in practice, in the Middle Ages for the average craftsman than there was in the capitalist period of mass production which followed even if theory would have it the other way.

For our purpose here, the essential thing about medieval society was that it was an ordered, structured society, with a population base which was, in each particular region, homogeneous. Thus, it was a society embued with certain natural defenses against penetration by alien elements. This is the reason the Middle Ages have been given such a bad press by Jewish authors and by those who take their cues from the Jews.

The Jew in medieval Europe had relatively little elbow room. He did not fit into the well established, well ordered scheme of things. He was an outsider looking into a self-sufficient world which had little use for his peculiar talents.

The Jew, accordingly, was obliged to confine his activity to those fields of endeavor not organically related to the life of the peoples on whom he wished to prey: he did those things which others were forbidden to do or did not wish to do or were unable to do. He existed on the fringes of European society, but he was not an integral part of it.

This was the situation for the better part of a millennium, and throughout that long period the foremost goal of the Jew was to destroy the order, to break down the structure, to loosen the bonds which held European society together, and thereby to create an opening for himself.

Mosquitoes and Jews

The common mosquito is a parasite which sucks its sustenance from the bloodstream of its host — and yet, it can do so only after it has injected some of its own saliva into the host’s blood. The reason is that the nutriment the mosquito seeks, the blood cells of the host, will not flow easily into the mosquito’s proboscis. in order to suck them up it must first break down their structure, and this is accomplished by the injected saliva.

Likewise, the Jew, in order to prey on other peoples, must disrupt their societies, and he accomplishes this by the injection of his own special poison into their bloodstream.

Order is the Jew’s mortal foe. One cannot understand the role of the Jew in modern European history unless one first understands this principle.

The Eternal Bolshevik

It explains why the Jew is the eternal Bolshevik: why he is a republican in a monarchist society, a capitalist in a corporate society, a communist in a capitalist society, a liberal “dissident” in a communist society — and, always and everywhere, a cosmopolitan and a race mixer in a homogeneous society.

And, in particular, it explains the burning hatred the Jews felt for European institutions during the Middle Ages. It explains why the modern Jewish spokesman, Abram Sachar, in his A History of the Jews, frankly admits that the universal attitude of the Jews toward medieval European society was, “Crush the infamous thing!”

Yet, even in the Middle Ages the Jews did not do badly for themselves, and they certainly had little cause for complaint, except when their excesses brought the wrath of their hosts down on their heads. As was pointed out in the previous installment, the Jews established an early stranglehold on the commerce of Europe, monopolizing especially foreign trade. Even after the establishment of the merchant guilds in the 12th century freed most local trade from the Jews’ control, they remained well entrenched in the import-export business.

Gold and Flesh

Their real forte, however, was in two staples of commerce forbidden to most Gentiles in Christian Europe: gold and human flesh. Aristotle’s denunciations of usury had influenced the leaders of the Church against moneylending, and the practice was consequently forbidden to Christians on religious grounds — although the ban was not always strictly observed. The field was left almost entirely to the Jews, who, in contrast to the Christians, used their religion as an explicit justification for usury:

“Unto a stranger (goy) thou mayest lend upon interest but unto thy brother thou shalt not lend upon interest, that the Lord thy God may bless thee in all that thy settest thine hand to in the land to which thou goest, to possess it.” (Deuteronomy 23:20)

It is interesting to note the sharp distinction between what it is permissible to do to a Gentile (stranger, or goy) and to a fellow Jew. Moses, the purported author of this basis for all Jewish business ethics, was speaking from the experience the Jews had already gained in Egypt when he indicated that the ultimate goal of moneylending to the strangers in a land “to which thou goest” was to “possess” the land.

White Slavery

When it came to the slave trade, the words of Moses were not just permissive, but imperative:

“Both thy male and female slaves, whom thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen [goyim] that are round about you; of them shall ye buy male and female slaves…. And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your slaves forever; but over your brethren, the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigor.” (Leviticus 25:44-46)

It is truly said by the Jews themselves that the Hebrew spirit breathes in every word of the Old Testament!

In Eastern Europe and the Mediterranean area the guild system did not reach the full development that it did in the West and the North of Europe, and Jews in Russia, Poland, Lithuania, and parts of Italy engaged in a few trades besides moneylending and slave dealing: the liquor business, in particular. Jews eventually owned most of the inns of Eastern Europe. They also monopolized the garment industry throughout large areas of the East and the South, and the Jewish tailor, the Jewish rag-picker, and the Jewish used clothes peddler are proverbial figures.

Yankel the Jew

None of these trades earned them the love or respect of the Gentiles among whom they lived, however, and usually there was good reason for the lack of affection. The 19th-century Russian writer Nikolai Gogol paints an interesting picture of the circumstances surrounding a Jewish innkeeper in the Ukraine:

“He had been living there for some time, renting land, running an inn, and gradually making all the local gentry and aristocracy dependent upon him by draining them of practically all their funds, thus making his presence strongly felt in the area. Not a single house in good repair could be found within a three-mile radius of Yankel’s house; everything was left to go to ruin and every penny was spent on drink, until all that was left was poverty and rags as though a fire or a plague had swept over the place. And had Yankel remained there another ten years, he certainly would have succeeded in spreading misery over the entire province.” (Taras Butba, chap. 10)

East and West

The relatively greater opportunities for exploitation of the Gentiles in the East, not to mention the strong presence of the Khazar-descended Jews there, led to a gradual concentration of Europe’s Jews in Poland and Russia during the Middle Ages. By the latter part of the l8th century, half the world’s Jews were living in Poland. Their power became so great that many medieval Polish coins, minted during periods when Jews were in charge not only of collecting the taxes, but also of administering the treasury itself, bore inscriptions in Hebrew. The Jews even acquired title to the land on which many Polish and Russian churches stood, and they then charged the Christian peasants admission to their own churches on Sunday mornings.

The essential difference between the Jewish experience in Western Europe and that in Eastern Europe during the Middle Ages is that in the West the earlier collapse of feudalism and the rise of the craft and trade guilds allowed the Europeans to win the contest with the Jews for economic dominance. In the East the Jews had already gained such a strong position by the time industry and town life began to compete effectively with agriculture and rural life that they were able to win the ensuing contest with their Gentile hosts.

Only Mercantile Class

In the West the Europeans froze the Jews out of the industrial and much of the commercial life of medieval society; in the East the Jews froze the Europeans out. In much of Eastern Europe, Jews became the only mercantile class in a world of peasants and laborers, and they used all their cunning and all the power of their wealth co keep their Gentile hosts down.

Reaction inevitably set in in the East, however, just as it had in the West. The l7th century was a period of great uprisings against the Jews, a period when such heroes as the great Cossack hetman and Jew-killer, Bohdan Khmelnytsky, flourished.

In the l8th century the rulers themselves were finally obliged to take strong measures against the Jews of the East, so bad had the situation become. Russia’s Catherine the Great (1729-96), who had inherited most of Poland’s Jews after the partition of the latter country, extended and enforced prohibitions against them which not only limited their economic activity but banned them altogether from large areas.

The Jew as Antigen

The following generalization is certainly imprecise, and many exceptions to it can be cited, but it may nonetheless be helpful to add a further conclusion to the aforementioned difference between the histories of Jew-Gentile relations in the East and in the West: in the West the Europeans won the upper hand early, and, suffering less from the Jews than did their kinsmen in the East, had less opportunity to develop in the Western European bloodstream the antibodies which are the natural reaction to the Jewish presence.

In the East the people freed themselves from Jewish domination much later, but by the time they finally did they had developed a much stronger natural immunity to the Jewish poison. It is hardly an exaggeration to say that the Pole, the Russian, the Lithuanian, the Ukrainian — the Eastern European generally — takes in his hatred of the Jews with his mother’s milk, if he is not born with it, and all the pro-Jewish preachments of his church and edicts of his government do little to lessen this natural and healthy antipathy.

It is this which goes a long way toward explaining how the Poles, saddled with a communist government consisting almost entirely of Jews after the Second World War, have been able in the last three decades to do what Adolf Hitler could not: namely, make Poland into a country which is virtually Jew-free today. Of more immediate relevance at this point in our story, it is the relatively weaker natural resistance to Jews in the West which suggests why it was relatively easy for the Jews there to take advantage of the breakdown of the medieval order and the dissolution of long-established social structures in order to make new openings for themselves.

The Reformation

Another factor which undoubtedly made the West more susceptible to the Jews was the Reformation, the lasting effects of which were confined largely to Europe’s northwestern regions in fact, to the Germanic-speaking regions: Germany, Scandinavia, England and Scotland, Switzerland. The Church of Rome and its Eastern Orthodox offshoot had always been ambivalent in their attitudes toward the Jews. On the one hand, they fully acknowledged the Jewish roots of Christianity, and Jesus’ Jewishness was taken for granted. On the other hand, the Jews had rejected Jesus’ doctrine and killed him, saying, “His blood be on us and on our children” (Matthew 27:25), and the medieval Church was inclined to take them at their word.

In addition to the stigma of deicide the Jews also bore the suspicion which naturally fell on heretics of any sort. During the Middle Ages people took Christianity quite seriously, and anyone professing an unorthodox religious belief, whether he actively sought converts or not, was considered a danger to the good order of the community and to the immortal soul of any Christian exposed to him.

Clergy vs. Bible

Because of this ambivalence the Jews were sometimes favored by the Church and sometimes persecuted, depending to a large degree on the temper of the times and local circumstances. When the priests and bishops were in a relaxed and self-confident frame of mind, the Jews could generally count on support from the pulpit, but whenever the Church became wracked by one of its many paroxysms of militance or defensiveness, the Jews were well advised to maintain a low profile. The Reformation brought on the greatest paroxysm the Church had ever experienced, and in Catholic lands Jews fell as far from favor as they rose in Protestant areas.

What the Protestant reformers did for the Jews was give the Hebrew Scriptures a much more important role in the life of the peoples of Europe than they had enjoyed previously. Among Catholics it was not the Bible but the Church which was important. The clergy read the Bible; the people did not. The people looked to the clergy for spiritual guidance, not to the Bible.

Among Protestants that order was reversed. The Bible became an authority unto itself, which could be consulted by any man. Its Jewish characters — Abraham, Moses, Solomon, David, and the rest — became heroic figures, suffused with an aura of sanctity. Their doings and sayings became household bywords.

The Great Reformer

It is ironic that the father of the Reformation, Martin Luther, who inadvertently helped the Jews fasten their grip on the West, detested them and vigorously warned his Christian followers against them. His book Von den Jueden und ihren Luegen (On the Jews and their Lies), published in 1543, is a masterpiece.

Luther’s antipathy to the Jews came after he learned Hebrew and began reading the Talmud. He was shocked and horrified to find that the Hebrew religious writings were dripping with hatred and contempt for all non-Jews. Luther wrote:

Do not their Talmud and rabbis say that it is no sin to kill if a Jew kills a heathen, but it is a sin if he kills a brother in Israel? It is no sin if he does not keep his oath to a heathen. Therefore, to steal and rob, as they do with their usury, from a heathen is a divine service. For they hold that they cannot be too hard on us nor sin against us, because they are the noble blood and circumcised saints. We, however, are cursed goyim. And they are the masters of the world and we are their servants, yea, their cattle….

I hear it said that the Jews give large sums of money and thereby are helpful to the government. Yes, from what do they give it? Not of their own, but from the property of the rulers and subjects, whom they deprive of their possessions through usury. And thus the rulers take from the subjects what the Jews have taken … so they can remain in the land freely to lie, slander, curse, and steal. Should not the Jews have a good laugh over the way we permit ourselves to be fooled and led around by the nose to give our money in order that they may stay in the land to practice all manner of wickedness?

Tragedy of Luther

Alas, Luther could not have it both ways. He had already sanctified the Jews by elevating the status of their history, their legends, and their religion to that of Holy Writ. His translation of the Old Testament into German and his dissemination of the Jewish scriptures among his followers vitiated all his later warnings against the Jews. Today the church he founded studiously ignores those warnings.

Luther had recognized the evils in the Christian Church of his day and in the men who ruled the Church. He also recognized the evil in the Jews and the danger they posed to Europe. He had the courage to denounce both the Church and the Jews, and for that the White race will be indebted to him for as long as it endures.

The great tragedy of Luther is that he failed to go one step further and to recognize that no religion of Jewish origin is a proper religion for men and women of European race. When he cut himself and the majority of the Germanic peoples off from Rome, he failed at the same time to cut away all the baggage of Jewish mythology which had been imposed on Europe by Rome. Instead he made of that baggage a greater spiritual burden for his people than it already was.

Elevation of the Old Testament

The consequence was that within a century of Luther’s death much of Northern Europe was firmly in the grip of a new superstition as malignant as the old one, and it was one in which the Jews played a much more explicit role. Before, the emphasis had been on the New Testament: that is, on Christianity as a breakaway sect from Judaism, in which the differences between the two religions were stressed. The role models held up to the peoples of Europe were the Church’s saints and martyrs, most of whom were non-Jewish. The parables taught to children were often of European origin.

Among the Protestants the Old Testament gained a new importance, and with it so did the Hebrew patriarchs as role models, while Israel’s folklore became the new source of moral inspiration for Europe. Perhaps nothing so clearly demonstrates the change, and the damage to the European sense of identity which accompanied it, as the sudden enthusiasm for bestowing Hebrew names on Christian children.

Puritan Madness

Even before the Reformation a few Jewish names had been adopted by Europeans, but they were in most cases variations of the names of Christian saints of Jewish race: John (Heb. Johanan), Matthew (Heb. Mattathiah), Mary (Heb. Miriam), Ann (Heb. Hannah, supposedly the name of the maternal grandmother of Jesus). In addition, a few other purely Hebrew names had come into fairly common usage in parts of Christian Europe prior to Luther’s time: Adam, Daniel, David, Michael, Elizabeth, and Sarah are examples.

During the l7th century, however, practically every name from the Old Testament came into general use. The madness reached its height among the Puritans, who scorned the names of their own ancestors and christened their offspring with such atrociously alien appellations as Israel, Amos, Ezekiel, Lemuel, Deborah, Reuben, Esther, Abner, Samuel, Nathan, Noah, Ephraim, Gideon, Jesse, Rachel, Susannah, Leah, Elihu, Abigail, Benjamin, and Abraham. The Puritans brought this pernicious habit with them to America, and Hebrew names were more common in the New World than European names during the Colonial period.

Parental Ignorance

Fortunately, most of these names have fallen out of favor in the present era, but some of them persist, largely through the ignorance of parents who do not realize they are giving their child a Jewish name when they choose David, Joseph, Susan, or Ruth. Indeed, a few Jewish names are so common today that almost no one thinks of them as Jewish. What name could be more “Irish” than Mike, or more “English” than Johnny?

Ironically, a number of perfectly, good European names are avoided today, because they are thought of as “Jewish sounding” — the consequence of their popularity among Jewish name-changers. Such are Seymour, Sidney, Sheldon, Stanley, Melvin, and Murray, for example.

Since ignorance of this topic is so abysmal among the White population today, and since we are concerned with identity above all else in this series, a brief diversion on names seems in order here. The European ancestors of today’s White Americans spoke a variety of languages, each of which provides a rich source of names bearing a purely European identity, with no Semitic taint.

Germanic Names

In terms of the number of descendants of these ancestors in the United States today, the Germanic languages should be by far the most important of these sources. Names of Germanic origin are fairly easy to spot; most of them are compounds of common Germanic words designating things (animals, weapons) or attributes (wisdom, brightness, a color, nobility, courage). Thus: Albert (noble-bright), Arnold (eagle-power), Baldwin (bold-friend), Bernard (bear-hard), etc.

In addition to these numerous compound names, there are several very common one-syllable Germanic names. Examples are Carl (Karl, Charles) and Earl.

Generally, names ending in -ald or -old (“power” or “authority”), such as Gerald, Harold; -ard ( “hard”), such as Al(l)ard, Richard; -bert (“bright”), such as Herbert, Robert; -gar or -ger (“spear”), such as Edgar, Roger; -mond or -mund (“protection”), such as Edmund, Raymond; -olf, -alph, or -ulf (“wolf”), such as Adolf, Ralph; -rad or -red (“counsel”), such as Alfred, Conrad; -ric (“ruler”), such as Eric, Frederic(k); or -win (“friend”), such as Edwin, Godwin; are Germanic.

Many Germanic feminine names are derived directly from corresponding masculine forms: Alberta, Caroline, Charlotte. But there are also many purely feminine forms: Adelaide (and the related form Alice), Astrid, Audrey (from Etheldreda), Belinda, Bertha, Clotilde, Edith, Matilda, etc.

Celtic Names

The Celtic languages provide fewer names, but some of those are fairly popular today. Examples are Alan (Allan, Allen), Barry, Brian (Bryan), Bridget, Conan, Donald, Douglas, Duncan, Gladys, Gwendolyn, Joyce, Kenneth, Malcolm, Muriel, Lloyd, Neil, Owen, and Una.

Easily as common as the Celtic names today are those which come directly from Greek and Latin — not because many of our ancestors were Greeks or Romans, but because those two languages were widely used for literary purposes in Europe until a few centuries ago. Many feminine names, in particular, are in this group.

Classical Names

A few such names stemming from either Greek (G.) or Latin (L.), are: Agatha (G.), Agnes (G.), Alexander and Alexandra (G.), Andrew and Andrea (G.), Anthony and Antonia (L.), August and Augustine (L.), Barbara (G.), Beatrice (L.), Berneice (G.), Cecil and Cecelia (L.), Clara (L.), Claude and Claudia (L.), Constance (L.), Cornelius and Cornelia (L.), Den(n)is and Denise (G.), Diana (L.), Eugene and Eugenia (G.), Florence (L.), George and Georgia (G.), Grace (L.), Gregory (G.), Helen — also Elaine, Eleanor, Ellen, Nell (G.), Irene (G.), Julius and Julia (L.), Katherine — also Catherine, Cathy, Kate, Kitty (G.), Laurence and Laura (L.), Margaret — also Marguerite, Margot, Gretchen, Greta, Madge, Meg, Marjorie, Rita (G.), Martin, Nicholas (G.), Patrick and Patricia (L.), Phil(l)ip (G.), Phyllis (G.), Priscilla (L.), Rhoda (G.), Sophia (G.), Stella (L.), Sylvia (L.), Theodore and Dorothy (G.), Timothy (G.), Ursula (L.), Valerie (L.), Victor and Victoria (L.), Vincent (L.), and Virginia (L.).

It goes without saying, of’ course, that no one is to blame for the name his parents bestowed on him, for whatever reason. But no well-informed, racially conscious White parents today have any excuse for naming a child of theirs Matthew or Michael, Rachel or Ruth.

If one of the more common Germanic, Celtic, or Classical names will not do, it is far better to dip back into the richness of the European past for a less common name, like Alaric or Adalbert, Gerda or Gunilda, than to stick the poor tot with a Hebrew label for life.

And there is no reason why parents of Polish, Ukrainian, or Russian ancestry in this country should not name a child Casimir or Igor, Ludmila or Vera. But, please, not Ivan or Masha, which are merely Slavicized variants of Hebrew names!

There are a number of currently available books on the origins and meanings of given names. An inexpensive one which, although far from exhaustive, is authoritative and especially thorough in giving the original source and meaning of each of the 1,200-1,500 names it treats, is The Oxford Dictionary of English Christian Names, by E.G. Withycombe.

Welcome Chaos

The Reformation did more for the Jews than merely sanctifying the Old Testament. It shattered the established order of things and brought chaos in political as well as spiritual affairs — chaos eagerly welcomed by the Jews. Germany was so devastated by a series of bloody religious wars that it took her a century and a half to recover. In some German principalities two-thirds of the population was annihilated during the conflicts between Catholics and Protestants in the period 1618-1648, commonly known as the “Thirty Years War.”

Everywhere during the l7th century the Jews took advantage of the turmoil, moving back into countries from which they had been banned (such as England), moving to take over professions from which they had been excluded, insinuating themselves into confidential relationships with influential leaders in literary and political circles, profiting from the sufferings of their hosts and strengthening their hold, burrowing deep into the rubble and wreckage of medieval society so that they could more easily undermine whatever rose in its stead.

French Revolution

In the following century came Europe’s next great cataclysm, which broke down what was left of the old order. It was the French Revolution — and it was the first major political event in Western Europe in which Jews played a significant role, other than as financiers. Even so, public feeling against the Jews was such that they still found it expedient to exercise much of their influence through Gentile front men.

Honore Gabriel Riqueti, Comte de Mirabeau (1749-91), the Revolution’s fieriest orator — the spendthrift, renegade son of an aristocrat, disowned by his father and always in need of a loan — was one of these. Another was the bloodthirsty monster Maximilien Marie Isidore de Robespierre (1758-94), dictator of the Revolutionary Tribunal which kept the guillotine busy and spilled France’s best blood into the gutters of Paris while the rabble cheered. Both Mirabeau and Robespierre worked tirelessly for their Jewish patrons, supporting legislation granting new rights and privileges to the Jews of France and denouncing French patriots who opposed the Jewish advances.

Napoleon and the Jews

It was in the new series of European wars spawned by the Revolution, in which Napoleon Bonaparte (1769-1821) was the leading figure, that the Jews extended the gains they had made in France to much of the rest of Europe. Behind Napoleon’s armies, which were kept solvent by Jewish moneylenders, marched a ragtag band of Jews to oversee the pulling down of all barriers against their brethren in each country in which French arms triumphed. Ghettos were abolished, all restrictions on Jewish activities were declared void, and anyone who spoke out against the Jews was in danger of being put before a military firing squad.

Despite the enormous services he performed for the Jews, it is clear from his comments, on many different occasions, that Napoleon personally despised them. “The Jews are a vile people, cowardly and cruel,” he said in reference to some of the atrocities committed by Jews during the Reign of Terror. “(They are) the most despicable race in the world.”

In a letter of March 6, 1808, to his brother Jerome, Napoleon wrote: “I decided to improve the Jews. But I do not want more of them in my kingdom. Indeed, I have done all to prove my scorn of the vilest nation in the world.” And when, in 1807, Napoleon issued decrees limiting the extent to which Jewish moneylenders could prey on the French peasantry, the Jews screamed in rage against him.

Finance Capitalism

But the damage had already been done; Napoleon had pulled down the last of the barriers, and by the time of his disgrace and exile the Jews were solidly entrenched nearly everywhere.

It was not merely politics which had changed by the 19th century, making European society more vulnerable to the Jews. Society itself had undergone a fundamental transformation with the rise of finance capitalism and the factory system. The old, organic lifestyles were gone, along with the corporate social structure the Jews had found so hateful because it was so impenetrable. In Europe spiritual man was fighting a losing battle against economic man in the struggle to determine the course of future developments, and the Jews had allied themselves firmly with the latter.

With the transformation of individual craftsmen, tradesmen, and small landowners into interchangeable units of labor, the Jews could slip in anywhere, and they did. Not content with having all avenues open to them, they continued their efforts to break down order and structure of every sort — only now they were working on the inside instead of the outside and were a thousand times deadlier.

The continued social and political upheavals of the 19th century were proof enough of this. Liberalism was the ostensible driving force behind the agitation and disturbances of the period 1815-1848, but actually there were a number of forces at work, and both Gentiles and Jews were responsible.

In the year of culmination — 1848 — the Jews unveiled a new weapon in their age-old war against European man, and this time it was an entirely Jewish weapon: Karl Marx (1818-83), the descendant of a long line of rabbis and Talmudic scholars, published his Communist Manifesto.

Three-Front War

The revolution of 1848 did not succeed; another seven decades of undermining and a World War would be required before Jewish Marxism could gain its first bloody triumph over the hated goyim. But from the middle of the 19th century the Jews waged their war against Gentile society on three fronts simultaneously.

On the capitalist front the Rothschild family set the pace. The descendants of a Frankfurt rabbi, Meyer Amschel (1743-1812), who switched from Torah-thumping to loan-sharking in the last part of the l8th century and waxed enormously rich as a result, they began by lending money at interest on commercial ventures, graduated to financing European wars, and ended up as bankers to entire nations.

They bought their way into the degraded English and Austrian nobilities, and they had their hands in virtually every industry, business, and government ministry in Europe by 1850. And behind the Rothschilds scrambled a hungry horde of other Jewish money men. With the medieval structure which had been an insurmountable barrier to them only a faint memory in the minds of the Gentiles, the Jews spread their grasp everywhere in the world of ownership and management.

Social Democracy

On the communist front Marx’s most illustrious disciple was Ferdinand Lassalle (1825-1864), the son of a wealthy Jewish merchant in Breslau. A gifted and tireless agitator for the communist cause, Lassalle founded the Social Democratic Party of Germany in 1863, from which the other social democratic parties of Europe sprang. His career was cut short, however, when he brashly proposed marriage to the daughter of an aristocratic German family, and the girl’s outraged lover put a bullet into the presumptuous Jew’s head.

Gentiles were involved in the communist movement, just as they were involved in Rothschild-style capitalism, but Jews thoroughly dominated it. Although the leader of the Bolshevik faction which launched the revolution of 1917 in Russia, Lenin, was only one-quarter Jewish, easily three-quarters of the other leading communists prior to the Second World War were Jews.

It has been on the third front, however, that the Jews have done the greatest damage. In a sense both the Jewish capitalists and the Jewish communists, the Rothschilds and the Marxes, despite their enormous power over the Gentile world, always remained outsiders. It was those Jews who pushed their way into the professions — into teaching Gentile university students, into writing books for Gentile readers, into composing music for Gentile audiences, into painting pictures and directing films for Gentile viewers, into interpreting and passing judgment on every facet of Gentile culture and society for Gentile newspaper readers — who really got inside the Gentile citadel.

ILLUSTRATIONS

a) MEDIEVAL EUROPEAN LIFE was vigorous, varied, and stimulating. It was also organic and ordered, and society offered little scope for aliens with clever tongues to wriggle in for a free ride. The illustration here is based on a l5th-century painting by the Flemish artist Pol de Limbourg.

b) SIEGE AND SACK of Magdeburg, Germany, in 1631 was one of the bloodiest and cruelest events of the exceptionally bloody and cruel Thirty Years War, which was fueled by religious hatred between Protestants and Catholics. Catholic troops butchered 20,000 Magdeburg residents when the city fell, and similar acts of butchery elsewhere left Germany too weak to resist Jewish infiltration and subversion.

c) SEXUAL SADISM, reflecting the influence of the peculiarly Jewish attitude toward sex, was an especially unpleasant feature of the Reign of Terror during the French Revolution. This young girl, depicted in a drawing from the period, was tortured to death simply because she was one of the queen’s chambermaids. The same Jewish sexual sadism was a feature of Soviet propaganda during the Second World War. Jewish propaganda commissar Ilya Ehrenburg, in one of his most infamous exhortations, urged the Red Army troops who were invading Germany: “Break the pride of the Germanic women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill as you storm onward, gallant soldiers of the Red Army.”

d) MORDECHAI LEVI, not Karl Marx, would have been the name known to history for the founder of communism, but for the name-changing opportunism of his father and grandfather. When the father switched the family’s religion to Christianity for business reasons, the son’s given name was changed from Mordechai to Karl. The news clipping is from the October 30, 1975, issue of the Jewish Sentinel. The movement founded by Mordechai Levi-Karl Marx has already murdered an estimated 50 million Europeans.

e) JEWISH COMMUNISTS made up the bulk of the Bolshevik leadership during the Bolshevik Revolution and the early years of the Soviet Union. This 1917 photograph was taken at a meeting of the communist leaders in Petrograd (formerly St. Petersburg, now Leningrad). Four of the five top communists seated at the table are Jews. They are, from left to right: Moses Uritsky, commissar of the Petrograd Cheka; Leon Trotsky, later Red Army commissar; Yakov Sverdlov, second president of the Soviet Republic; and Grigori Zinoviev, president of the Petrograd Soviet. The ethnic affiliation of the man seated at the right end of the table is unknown.

f) UKRAINIANS are probably the world’s most Jew-sensitive people, and this portion of a recent cartoon from a Ukrainian magazine shows that not even the Kremlin’s official disapproval of any overt anti-Semitism can force them to stifle completely their natural hatred of Jews. The complete cartoon shows the Jew and the Nazi, under the same yoke, pulling a garbage cart labeled “Anti-Sovietism” and “Cold War.” The Ukrainian people suffered terribly at the hands of the Jews, who were riding high as Soviet commissars, in the years immediately after the Bolshevik Revolution. The penalty then for any expression of hostility to the Jews was death; but since the Second World War, the reemergence of Russian nationalism, and the breaking of the Jewish stranglehold on the Soviet government, the natural tendencies of the Ukrainians and other Eastern European peoples have once again begun to find healthy expression in art and literature.

In recent installments we have seen the White race expand outward from Europe over the globe, conquering and colonizing; we have traced its interactions with alien races in particular, with the Jews; and we have seen its way of life transformed radically, as the feudalism and then the corporatism of the Middle Ages gave way to new social forms in the modern era.

We have also witnessed two major upheavals: the Reformation, followed by the ruinous Thirty Years War; and the French Revolution, followed by the Napoleonic Wars. In both cases White society was badly disrupted, and the race’s defenses against its enemies were weakened. As we saw in the last installment, the Jews were quick to take advantage of this.

From Atoms to the Stars

Nevertheless, when the 20th century dawned European man was still firmly in control everywhere, and he was on the verge of some of the most magnificent victories of his entire history. The first quarter of the century saw the birth of modern physics, with the pioneering work of Max Planck, Erwin Schroedinger, Werner Heisenberg, and others, who gave to our race the conceptual tools which allowed us to understand the microscopic world: the interaction of matter and radiation, the behavior of electrons in crystals, the structure of the atom and its nucleus.

Other White pioneers — the Russian, Konstantin Tsiolkovsky; the German, Hermann Oberth; the American, Robert Goddard — gave us the modern rocket engine and the dream of using it to explore the macroscopic world of interplanetary and interstellar space.

Democracy on the March

But the same quarter-century also saw White men slaughter one another on an unprecedented scale. Although only the American promoters of the slaughter were so brazen as to openly proclaim that its purpose was to “make the world safe for democracy,” that, in fact, was the outcome which the First World War went a long way toward establishing. It was a democratic war, in which finance-capital and the manipulators of the rabble joined hands to finish the job begun 125 years earlier with the storming of the Bastille.

With the politicians cheering them on from a safe distance, 61 million White men (plus some four million assorted Japanese, Turks, and Negroes) marched forth to do battle. Nine million of them never marched back. Seven million White civilians also lost their lives, many of them from the starvation caused by a British naval blockade of Germany and her allies which was maintained even after hostilities on the battlefield had ended.

But the cause of democracy was definitely advanced. In the first place, by selectively killing off the brightest and the bravest as never before, the war left a population more susceptible to the type of mass manipulation inherent in democratic rule. And, of course, autocratic rule suffered a major setback, as Kaiser and Tsar met their ends.

Zionism and Communism

The chaos, the breakdown of long-established institutions, and the political exigencies of the war gave the enemies of the race several excellent opportunities for furthering their own ends: the Jews scored major triumphs on both the Zionist and the Marxist fronts.

With the war stalemated in 1916 and the British considering an armistice with the Germans, the Jews stepped forward and offered their services to the British government in persuading the government of the United States to enter the war on the British side. As a quid pro quo they demanded British backing for their territorial ambitions in the Middle East. The consequence of the deal struck between the British and the Jews was the sudden switch early in 1917 by U.S. President Woodrow Wilson from an anti-war to a pro-war position, and the issuance by the British government in that same year of the infamous Balfour Declaration, promising support for “the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people.”

It is said that the Treaty of Versailles ending the First World War was the cause of the Second World War. The most likely cause of a Third World War will be the Balfour Declaration.

Democracy in Russia

In Russia the social and economic ravages of the war provided the necessary preconditions for the success of the Bolshevik Revolution, another giant step forward for democracy — at least, in the eyes of President Wilson and others of a similar mindset. Addressing the U.S. Congress on April 2, 1917, and referring to the mutinies in the Russian Army and Navy of the previous month, in which Bolshevik-incited troops had risen, butchered their officers, and established “soldiers’ councils” and “sailors’ councils,” Wilson said: “Does not every American feel that assurance has been added to our hope for the future peace of the world by the wonderful and heartening things that have been happening within the last few weeks in Russia?”

Those who, like Wilson, fawned on the Jews also found “wonderful and heartening” the consolidation of democracy in Russia which soon followed, when the triumphant Bolsheviks murdered most of the Russian intelligentsia.

Penicillin and Computers

Despite the enormous destruction and loss of life — more important, the loss in average biological quality of life — in the First World War, the second quarter of the century saw another spurt of racial progress. Great strides forward in the race’s understanding of the universe were made, and powerful new tools based on that understanding were acquired. Advances in aviation, electronics, the controlled release of nuclear energy, medicine, and biology were enormous.

From the chemists came plastics and a multitude of other new materials. Metallurgists, electrical engineers, and agricultural scientists made more progress than in any previous 25 years in history. Penicillin, the electronic digital computer, and television were born.

The National Socialist Revolution

Of greater significance ultimately than all these scientific and technological advances was the dawning of a new sense of racial consciousness and racial mission during the second quarter of the century, and the establishment of a new society based on this awakened racial feeling and dedicated to the goal of racial progress. The new society was that built by Adolf Hitler and his followers in National Socialist Germany between 1933 and 1945.

It was a society from which alien racial elements and alien spiritual and cultural influences were progressively excluded. The Jews who had been burrowing into German cultural life since the Napoleonic Wars of the previous century were rooted out of the universities and the government bureaucracy, the newspapers and the cinema, radio broadcasting and book publishing.

The homosexuals who had been parading along Berlin’s main streets in women’s clothing were rounded up and packed off to labor reeducation camps to think things over. Drug dealers and communist activists found themselves facing the executioner’s ax. The mulatto offspring of French-colonial Negro occupation troops and German women, stemming from the postwar period, were sterilized, along with tens of thousands of congenitally defective Germans.

The whole country was infused with a new spirit of health, vigor, and purpose. From kindergarten child to assembly-line worker; from urban housewife to farmer, university student, or soldier, there was a carefully planned, organized effort directed at each segment of the German population and aimed at integrating that segment into the national-racial whole as a healthy, functional, productive part.

An enormous investment was made in educational and recreational programs: curricula for the schools were redesigned to develop a strong sense of racial identity in each child; young adults were taught to look for the best racial qualities when seeking mates and to think of marriage as a sacred institution for producing the next generation of the race; workers were taken on group outings to different parts of the country in order to broaden their outlooks and augment parochial loyalties with national feelings; pageants, public lectures, folk festivals, fairs, parades, and other activities were used extensively to stimulate an understanding of and an appreciation for their cultural heritage among the people; hikes, campouts, and athletic endeavors of every sort — skiing, gymnastics, swimming, shooting, fencing, sailplane piloting — were organized for boys and girls throughout the country.

Ending Class Warfare

The Marxist-tinged labor unions were dissolved, and in their stead factory employees, together with factory owners and managers, were organized into a corporative industrial structure which not only reconciled the sometimes conflicting interests of labor and management, but which raised above both these the interests of the nation. The Jewish-Marxist tactic of class hatred and class struggle, which had been used to divide the Jews’ Gentile hosts against themselves, was forced to give way to a new spirit of class cooperation for promoting the common interest.

The differing values of human beings were no longer determined by the amounts of money they were able to accumulate, but by their inherent racial quality and by the social value of their work. The refuse collector, of sound racial stock, who performed his essential task well and responsibly was held in higher esteem than the money-hungry entrepreneur who made millions by exploiting the gullibility or the vices of his fellow men or by controlling the access to some essential commodity. In fact, the latter was likely to end up in a labor reeducation camp alongside the panhandler, the pimp, and the professorial purveyor of the lie of human equality.

Promoting Free Enterprise

Every businessman in National Socialist Germany was permitted the freedom to make a reasonable profit, so long as he served the public interest in doing so, and the freedom to starve, so long as he did so without making a public nuisance of himself. These two freedoms were recognized by the government as the two most certain guaranties of efficiency in the nation’s economy.

Therefore, every socially and racially responsible form of private enterprise was encouraged, while raceless, international finance-capitalism was sharply curtailed. The storekeeper who worked on his own premises, the independent craftsman who rented out his own skills, and the manufacturer who built up and managed his own plant — that is, who put his life into his enterprise, and not just his hoarded capital — were given the benefit of favorable legislation; a great many of the people who had formerly made their profits from speculation and from usury, from shuffling papers and knowing when to buy or sell, were put out of business. Those among the latter who had thought that Hitler would be forced to deal with them in order to keep his government and Germany’s industry solvent were simply bypassed when he turned to international barter instead of to international finance as a means of building Germany’s foreign trade in the face of a lack of liquid capital.

Training New Leaders

Most significant of all the institutions which formed the basis for Hitler’s new Germany was that designed for producing the future leaders of the country. Although the National Socialist German Workers’ Party had attained power in January 1933 by purely democratic means, those who believed that Hitler’s movement was only another political party, perhaps a bit more radical than the others, or that he intended to allow a continuation of “business as usual” in the political realm were mistaken in the most fundamental way.

Hitler was determined from the beginning that the new Germany would be a state ruled by a definite view of life, and not by politicians chosen either by power brokers in smoke-filled back rooms or by the fickle and easily manipulated masses. The leaders of the state would henceforth be men trained, screened, and selected for that task from their early youth, not those political candidates with the most fetching smiles and convincing lies, as was the rule elsewhere in the West.

Building Consciousness

Beginning at the age of six years the National Socialist youth organizations — first the Young Folk and the Young Girls, then the Hitler Youth and the League of German Girls — began training young Germans in willpower and character development, at the same time instilling in them a race-based view of life and a new set of fundamental values. After that came a two-year work period in the National Labor Service.

Finally, for the very best, there was the SS (Defense Echelon), which was much more than either a military or a political organization, although it was these too. The SS was also a holy brotherhood, an order of warrior-priests ordained as guardians of the National Socialist world view.

12-year Miracle

In the brief span of 12 years during which National Socialist Germany existed — only six of these years in peace — miracles of economic, social, scientific, and artistic achievement were wrought. While the United States and other Western nations still wallowed in the massive unemployment and misery of the Great Depression, Hitler had already restored Germany to full employment and prosperity. What the democracies could only achieve by aiming for war, Germany did as early as 1936 by building roads and Volkswagens.

The degeneracy and decadence which had characterized the democratic Weimar regime in Germany prior to 1933, with all its prancing homosexuals, self-destructive drug addicts, jaded thrill seekers, musical and artistic nihilists, pandering Jews, Marxist terrorists, and whining self-pitiers, were gone, and in their place was a nation of healthy, enthusiastic, self-reliant, and purposeful Germans: a nation led by progressive men and women conscious of the value of their race and their culture and committed to the advancement of both on all fronts.

And Germany was the only such nation in the White world. Italy had undertaken a number of progressive social, economic, and governmental reforms after the victory of Mussolini’s Fascist movement in 1923, but Fascism failed to put race in the center of life, as National Socialism did.

Implacable Hostility

In the non-White world Japan provided an outstanding example of race-consciousness, but it was not a new development for that country.

Nor, of course, was it new to the Jews, a people more chauvinistic than any other — and at the same time implacably hostile to every manifestation of national or racial feeling except their own. This hostility is understandable, in view of the unique Jewish lifestyle as a coherent minority everywhere in the midst of a majority of different race. One of the requirements for the maintenance of this lifestyle is that the host majority be kept incoherent and unconscious, lest it, like the pharaoh who “knew not Joseph,” rise up against the Jews and spew them out.

Thus, it was world Jewry which publicly declared war on National Socialist Germany only six months after Hitler took office as chancellor. In his declaration of war (published in the August 7, 1933, issue of the New York Times), Jewish leader Samuel Untermyer explicitly noted that he expected the Jews’ Christian friends to join them in their “holy war” (his words) against Germany.

And, of course, they did — not just the illiterate fundamentalists from America’s Appalachia, who, not knowing any Jews personally, found it easier to believe the Old Testament claim of Jewish “chosenness” than those who lived in closer proximity to the Self-Anointed Ones, but also the mainline Christians of America and Britain, the more intelligent of whom recognized in the National Socialist world view a creed antithetical to their own.

And the Gentile members of the international capitalist set, who were more than a little alarmed by Germany’s unorthodox financial arrangements, joined as well. As did the Marxists of every shade, of course, from parlor Pinks to revolutionary Reds. Everyone with a vested interest in the continuation of the decaying old order eventually enlisted in the “holy war” against Germany.

Altogether it was quite an orchestra: Catholics joined forces with Lutherans and Holy Rollers to stamp out the dangerous National Socialist heresy of the primacy of race and the breeding of the Superman; barter-hating bankers and competition-fearing manufacturers pitched right in with communist union organizers and academic Bolsheviks to put an end to a system which had succeeded in getting laborers and mangers to work together more productively than in any other nation; and on the conductor’s podium stood the Jew, who had to destroy Germany before the growing new race consciousness there spread to other lands.

Everything to Gain

It was one thing to recruit these elements, each of whom would lose if White resurgence continued. It was more difficult to recruit the rest of the White population, especially in the United States, which had everything to gain from the continued realization of Hitler’s dream: the annihilation of Bolshevism, for one thing; the liberation of their kinfolk in Europe from the influence of the Jew and the yoke of finance-capitalism, for another; best of all, the example of a proud, free, racially conscious White nation and its achievements.

In the 1930’s and early 1940’s the Jews had not yet consolidated their grip on all the news and entertainment media of the English-speaking world. There were no television networks, of course, and there were still many independent newspapers and magazines. A united opposition to Jewish war plans by alert Whites might have won the day.

Traitors Were Plentiful

Most Whites, however, were neither alert nor united. Their “leaders,” the products of a democratic system, were generally devoid of both character and any sense of responsibility. Only an exceptionally bold, selfless, and responsible few — men like aviation pioneer Charles Lindbergh — spoke out effectively. The Jews, on the other hand, found many prominent and powerful Whites with no scruples against taking their money and following their lead. In the United States their chief instrument became Franklin Roosevelt, and in Britain it became Winston Churchill.

Still, it was not an easy job to convince millions of White men — the majority of them originally of German origin — to march off to Germany in order to butcher their White cousins, just because the latter had dared raise their hands against the Chosen People.

Racial Feeling Not Dead

After all, English-speaking Whites were not entirely without racial feeling. In 1939 White Americans did not live with Blacks, work with Blacks, eat with Blacks, or go to school with Blacks, and anyone who had attempted to force them to do so certainly would have been lynched.

Likewise, the prospect of inviting millions of Blacks and Browns from the non-White portions of the British Empire to come settle in England alongside the English and be supported by them was simply unthinkable. Such a development would no more have been tolerated by the people of Britain than the sight of a Black male holding hands in public with a White woman would have been tolerated by the people of most sections of America.

Nor were the people fond of the Jews, who, despite the philo-Semitic preachings of the Christian churches, remained an outcast group viewed with suspicion and latent hostility, except by the most deracinated and liberalized Whites (and the Bible-bewitched Holy Rollers).

Spiritual Dimension Lacking

All this racial feeling, even though much of it was institutionalized (for example, the customary racial segregation in most of the United States), was less an obstacle to Jewish aims than it might have seemed. It was, in nearly all cases, unconscious feeling. The institutions in which it was embodied were dried out, without vitality. Most people supported the institutions merely because they were customary, without thinking about their origins, relevance to current trends, or ultimate effects.

Unlike the case in Germany, racial feeling and racial values in most of the White world had no conscious, living expression in a dynamic, progressive world view. In the United States and Britain they were without a spiritual dimension; their institutionalized forms served mainly the passive aim of maintaining the social status quo; there was no great, positive purpose — no long-term racial goal or ideal — to engage the imagination and secure the conscious commitment of a substantial portion of the population.

Lethal Provincialism

Thus, the Jews were to find it relatively easy later, in the postwar period, to undermine and destroy virtually every race-based institution in the West; and even before the war they soon learned how to manipulate Britons and Americans well enough to accomplish their aim of destroying Germany.

The Englishman who would have been greatly offended by the suggestion that the Jamaican Negro or the East Indian was his “equal” also considered himself superior, at least culturally, to the German and the Irishman; and he was, in true barnyard fashion, readier to pick a fight at any sign of encroachment by the latter, who were next to him in pecking order, than he was at a bit of uppishness on the part of the Black or Brown subject races.

The same, narrowminded, lethal provincialism was the rule in America: the White Mississippian of Anglo-Saxon stock who was careful always to maintain the proper social distance from the local Blacks also despised “Yankees.” He did not look upon Whites outside the South as his racial kinsmen — especially if they didn’t speak English, or spoke it with a different accent than he did.

Jewish War Propaganda

So the Jews turned this provincialism to their profit, by portraying Germans as strange, contemptible, alien creatures who goose-stepped, clicked their heels, wore monocles, and spent most of their time with their right arms thrust out stiffly at 45 degrees while shouting, “Sieg Heil!” The first Hollywood films with this portrayal were ground out in the mid-1930’s, and they’re still coming, half a century later.

Early in this propaganda effort the strangeness of the Germans was given a sinister twist: they were said to believe that they were all supermen and that non-Germans were subhuman. When they were not saluting and shouting, the Germans were bashing out the brains of non-German babies — or ghoulishly draining their blood. This author can remember, as an elementary school pupil in 1942, listening to the principal of his school announce over the public address system that the Germans were busily draining the blood from all the babies in Belgium, in order to use it for transfusions for their military casualties.

Back Door to War

And then, of course, there were the lies about German plans to invade the United States, via South America — after which, presumably, all American men would be packed off to concentration camps, the women to “Nazi stud farms,” and the children to the blood-draining centers. Not everyone believed the lies, but enough did, so that when the plot to get the United States into the war via the “back door” in the Pacific was finally hatched there was virtually no more public resistance.

But the campaign of lies was intensified, not abated, for this was to be much more than merely a military effort to force the Germans to change their politics. This was to be a total war; its aim was not only to “liberate” the Germans with fire and famine from their new sense of racial mission, but it was to destroy forever the possibility that some other group of White men and women might pick up and rekindle the torch that was to be knocked from the Germans hands.

Indeed, the Jews’ fear in this regard was shown to be well founded by the enormous success the SS had in recruiting volunteers in other nations. During the war there were French, Norwegian, Danish, Spanish, Walloon, Flemish, Dutch, Estonian, Latvian, Ukrainian, and even Russian SS divisions fighting alongside their German comrades against the Red Army. Had Hitler won the war, these non-German SS units would certainly have formed nuclei for the spread of the National Socialist revolution to every country in Europe. Therefore, the war was directed as much against the Americans, the British, and all the non-communist peoples of Europe as against the Germans, although few realized it at the time, even among those who had had the courage and foresight to speak out against it before Pearl Harbor.

Racial Suicide

When German strength faltered at Stalingrad, the democratic Allies celebrated the disaster, smiled at one another and said, “The tide has turned.” If they had known that it was the tide of all of Western civilization which began running out so swiftly at Stalingrad, their smiles would not have been quite so broad.

When huge fleets of R.A.F. and U.S.A.A.F. heavy bombers destroyed Hamburg in July and August 1943, killing 70,000 German civilians, the foolish British and Americans imagined that they had struck a great blow against their enemies. They little suspected that their true enemies rejoiced to see them killing so many of their own kind.

And when the raping queues of Mongol soldiers formed in every residential neighborhood of a shattered and defeated Berlin, in front of every house where they found a pretty German girl or woman, there was dancing in the streets of London and New York by throngs of empty-headed Whites who did not even dream that what they had caused to happen to the women of Germany would soon enough begin happening to their own women, on their own streets and in their own homes, and that Jew-instigated “civil rights” laws would render them powerless to defend their womenfolk against growing and ever-bolder swarms of savages from every non-White corner of the earth.

Not Like Korea or Vietnam

The generation born in the United States since the Second World War, which has experienced only the Korean and Vietnam wars, cannot imagine how altogether different was the behavior of the masters of the controlled media, the priests, the politicians, and all the other representatives of the old order — all the mortal enemies of a White renewal and resurgence — during that great conflict than the behavior they have manifested since then.

During the Second World War they knew well that their own continued existence, and the continued existence of the sickly creeds they represented, were at stake. They closed ranks and formed a united front, in which not only was dissent absent, but it became virtually unthinkable. There were no denunciations of the government’s war policy from the pulpit, no enemy propaganda in the newspapers, no Congressmen addressing Washington rallies in behalf of the folks on the other side, no government tolerance for pacifist demonstrations.

The Second World War was a “good” war, and no effort was spared to convince every citizen of that. Every facet of civilian life was deliberately altered in some way, so that everyone, in every waking moment, was conscious of the war and was involved in it to some extent. There were no bystanders, no neutrals, in America.

Phony Blackouts

It was not only assent that was demanded of everyone, but participation; everyone was made to share in the responsibility. There were scrap drives every other week. Air raid practice was frequent, with wardens assigned in every residential neighborhood and given silhouette cards of various enemy aircraft to memorize, even though the authorities knew there was virtually no chance of a significant air attack on the continental United States. Automobile owners were required to paint over the upper halves of their headlights, and there was much to-do about showing any lights after 10:00 PM.

Film stars made their public appearances in military uniforms, and posters and slogans were everywhere. Rationing became nearly universal, with government coupons needed to buy everything from sugar to automobile tires.

No one was left unchanged by the experience.

Postwar Payoff

And so it was that when the war was finally over — and to the people pulling the strings that meant when Germany was defeated, for Italy and Japan were wholly secondary concerns — it seemed only natural that many things should begin changing. After all, the people had assented to the destruction of everything for which National Socialist Germany stood.

Should Americans and Britons have given their all to smash racism in Germany, only to tolerate racism in America or in Britain?

Should people who had just finished killing millions of Germans, in order to teach them that they did not have the right to exclude Jews from their society, still believe that Mexicans could be excluded from the United States or Pakistanis from Britain? Should such a huge sacrifice have been made by everyone to annihilate an authoritarian, militaristic regime, without people also being obliged to change their own attitudes toward authority and military service?

No, it is quite clear that the era of social turmoil and change which followed the war grew inevitably out of the new attitudes deliberately inculcated in order to make the war possible.

And it is clear that the war not only resulted in a vast spread and strengthening of Marxist power, but that it also brought about a significant decline in the moral authority of the White world relative to Africa, Asia, and Latin America. The White man had questioned his own right to rule, and so he could hardly expect non-Whites not to ask the same questions. Thus, the dissolution of the British Empire, and the end of European colonialism everywhere, were direct consequences of the changed attitudes accompanying the war.

We All Lost the War

Finally, just as clearly as the Germans lost the war, so did Britain and the United States. In fact, the loser was the White race: European man, whatever his nationality. It was the greatest, most catastrophic loss the race has yet suffered. Whether the loss will prove to be irreparable and decisive remains to be seen.

ILLUATRATIONS

a) TRUE HEROES and villains of the first quarter of the 20th century are not those identified as such in most history books. A few of them, from left to right, are: Werner Heisenberg (1901-1976), one of the principal pioneers of modern physics; Robert H. Goddard (1882-1945), the American rocket pioneer; Hermann Oberth (1894- ), the German scientist whose speculations and calculations on space travel paralleled those of Goddard and others; Woodrow Wilson (1856-1924), whose scheming for war while promising peace served as a model for Franklin Roosevelt two decades later; Louis Brandeis (1856-1941), Wilson’s Jewish “adviser,” who served as a liaison with the Zionists who extracted from the British government a promise of support for their Middle Eastern territorial ambitions In return for bringing the United States Into the First World War.

b) THE LEADERS of the nation and the administrators of the state in Hitler’s Germany were not to be lawyers whose only qualifications were their “connections” and a gift for lying, as in the democratic states, but men carefully selected and trained for their tasks. More than that, they were to be men with a sense of mission and an unwavering commitment to the ideals of Hitler’s New Order. The training centers for these men, located in rural areas and with a regimen which was almost monastic, were appropriately called Ordensburgen. This is the courtyard of the main building of Ordensburg “Vogelsang,” on the Eifel plateau of western Germany, beside the Urft River.

c) PRODUCTIVE WORK was the basis of Germany’s recovery from the worldwide Great Depression. Adolf Hitler, here speaking with a group of autobahn workers, saw to it that no part of the German workers’ efforts went to the enrichment of financiers or other parasites. He gave work a spiritual dimension — even the rough and dirty work which had been looked down on by the arbiters of public opinion in the decadent Weimar era — and he built a state which united all workers in the great and holy cause of elevating the race. Every German boy and girl, before entering into either private or public life as a citizen, was expected to pass through a period of service to the nation, as are these members of the Reichsarbeitsdienst (National Labor Service) with their spades (below, left) and the Arbeitsmaid doing voluntary farm work.

d) MURDER of German POW’s — especially members of the SS — was condoned by U.S. military and political leaders as a means of stamping out National Socialist ideas. Christian leaders saw it as an acceptable means for preventing a dangerous resurgence of paganism, and the masters of the controlled media heartily approved. Here GI’s of the list Battalion, 157th Regiment, 45th Division, have just machine-gunned more than 100 SS guards who surrendered to them at the Dachau concentration camp. The machine gunner is kneeling over his weapon, and the bodies of the slain guards are heaped along the base of the wall. The three who remain standing were shot a few seconds after this photograph was taken by a freed inmate, Turkish journalist Nerin Gun, on April 29, 1945. Of all the Allied military leaders in occupied Germany, only General George Patton spoke out against such atrocities — and Eisenhower removed him from his post for it.

e) “OPERATION GOMORRAH” was the appropriately Semitic name chosen by the Churchill government for the plan to destroy Hamburg by carpet bombing. These are the corpses of a few of the German civilians killed in the series of Anglo-American bombing raids on Hamburg in the period July 24-August 3, 1943 — and especially in the fire storm created in the city by a massive R.A.F. raid on the night of July 27-28. The calculated Anglo-American strategy was to cripple German industry by causing as many civilian deaths as possible. The churchmen gave their blessings, and the controlled media cheered every raid. Quite a difference from the screams of outrage from pulpit and press whenever enemy civilians were killed by Americans In Vietnam!

f) RED ARMY soldiers raise hammer and sickle over the ruins of Berlin in May 1945. Most Americans were too entranced by nonstop Jewish propaganda to ask whether this was what they had fought for — or whether there had been anything to justify the destruction of Germany.

g) “THE BIG THREE,” as they liked to think of themselves — Churchill, Roosevelt, and Stalin — met at Yalta, a Soviet spa on the Black Sea, in February 1945 to lay plans for punishing the almost-conquered Germans and dividing up the postwar world. Actually, they were not so big after all, for they took their orders from others, who chose to remain behind the scenes — at least, Churchill and Roosevelt did. Soon after the war Stalin ruthlessly broke the power of organized Jewry in the Soviet Union, but Britain and America remained under Jewish rule. Of the White nations only the U.S.S.R. gained anything from the Second World War. The Jews soon showed their gratitude to Britain by agitating for the scuttling of her empire, while they undertook a huge and still continuing program of forced racial mixing between Whites and Blacks in the United States. 

Since the end of the Second World War the situation and the prospects of the White race have plummeted, both morally and materially.

As bad as the moral condition of the race was before the war, it became incalculably worse afterward. Not since the Thirty Years War had White men murdered one another with such religiously motivated ferocity and on such a scale. But this time the superstitions which had been employed to justify all the killing were not so deep-seated as they had been 300 years earlier.

When the bomber-sown fire storms which had incinerated hundreds of thousands of German women and children in Dresden, Hamburg, and a dozen other cities had cooled; when the last mass shooting of prisoners of war by the Americans was over; when the British had finished delivering hundreds of thousands of anti-communist Croats and Cossacks at bayonet point to their communist executioners in Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union; when the roving gangs of rapists in Soviet-occupied Berlin had finally become sated; when the orgies of murder in Paris and Prague and the other capitals of “liberated” Europe had died down, as the democratic and communist “heroes of the resistance” could find no more anti-Semites or racists or outspoken anti-communists or other “collaborators” to butcher in the improvised basement torture and execution chambers which had been set up everywhere — as soon as the advance of the Allied armies had made it safe to do so — when the war and its immediate, bloody aftermath were over and the White men of America and Britain had an opportunity to survey their handiwork and reflect on it, the first doubts came.

“We Killed the Wrong Pig”

One of those most directly responsible for the catastrophe, British Prime Minister Winston Churchill, expressed those doubts more bluntly and succinctly than the rest. As he contemplated Britain’s problematic future in a postwar Europe overshadowed by the new-grown Soviet colossus during one of his rare moments of sobriety, he blurted out: “We killed the wrong pig.” This was the same Churchill who a few months earlier, in a less sober moment, had symbolized his contempt for the defeated Germany by ostentatiously urinating into the Rhine in the presence of a group of newsmen.

Many of the Western leaders who had been involved in the war had no more moral compunction or sense of responsibility for what they had done than did Churchill. Others reacted to the prickings of conscience by lashing out again at their victims. The Jews found many willing collaborators in the promotion of their “Holocaust” hoax among these, who were all too eager to convince themselves that they had acted in the interests of Christian civilization in doing to the Germans what they had. Their hue and cry about “German war crimes” was often the most effective way of diverting attention from their own crimes and the crimes of others.

Postwar Frenzy

The details of the history of the postwar era varied in Britain, in America, in France, and in the other Western nations, but the general trends were the same everywhere. The following paragraphs refer specifically to the United States, but the conclusions to which they lead apply to the West generally.

In America most people just tried to put any troubling reflections about the events and the outcome of the war out of their minds and devoted themselves to a frenzy of making money and spending money. The dizzying rate at which the world began changing made forgetting easy. The war had disrupted old demographic patterns, brought a new sense of rootlessness to America, initiated the mass migrations to suburbs and bedroom communities.

Then there was the flood of new consumer products, new mores, new lifestyles: the age of the power lawnmower, of Playboy magazine, of air conditioning, and of the home television receiver was dawning. And so was the age of universal college education. Encouraged by the GI Bill, millions whose natural gifts suited them best for pumping gasoline or stacking apple crates began flooding into the nation’s institutions of higher learning for four-year sojourns which yielded little benefit to them, American educational standards, or the nation.

Civil Rights

And then, before anyone could catch his balance and figure out what it meant and where it would lead, the “civil rights” phenomenon burst upon postwar America. What would have been impossible before the war gathered momentum in the late 1940’s and carried all before it in the next two decades. When the smoke began to clear late in the 1960’s, White Americans found that they had bamboozled themselves out of their most precious and fundamental civil right: the right of free association.

No longer could they pick and choose their neighbors, taking reasonable measures to ensure that the racial makeup of the communities in which they lived would not deteriorate; any attempt to do so had become illegal and was punishable with a term of imprisonment in a Federal penitentiary.

No longer could they send their children to schools, supported by their own taxes, which were attended by other children of their own race.

No longer could those of them who were employers hire men and women of their own choosing.

Every place and every social grouping in which the White men and women of America had associated freely with their own kind — residential neighborhoods and workplaces, schools and recreation areas, restaurants and cinemas, military units and municipal police forces — was now open to non-Whites, and the latter were not slow to push their way in.

Multiracial Pseudo-nation

What had been accomplished in the astonishingly short time of a little over two decades was the transformation of the strongest, richest, and most advanced country on earth from a White nation, in which racial minority groups had been effectively excluded from any significant participation in White society except as laborers, to a multiracial pseudo-nation, in which non-Whites not only participated but were a privileged and pampered elite.

The magnitude of the transformation is not apparent to many Whites who were born after it began, but it can be comprehended easily enough by surveying the cultural records of the earlier era. A comparison of magazine advertisements or photographed street scenes, of popular fiction or elementary school textbooks, of motion pictures or faces in high school yearbooks from 1940 with those of the last decade tells the story in stark terms.

Not only was this radical dispossession of White Americans carried out in the name of “justice” and “freedom,” but hardly a shot was fired in the process: all together no more than a dozen Whites fell in the weak and utterly ineffectual resistance mounted against it. More than anything else, this lack of resistance indicates the moral state of the race in the postwar era.

It is true, of course, that the Jews, who planned and played a large part in directing the dispossession, had prepared well. A few years prior to the war there were still major segments of the American news and entertainment media in the hands of racially conscious Whites. Major publishers in the 1920’s and 1930’s published books dealing frankly with eugenics, with racial differences, and with the Jewish problem. America’s foremost industrialist, Henry Ford, for a while in the 1920’s was presenting purchasers of his automobiles with complimentary copies of The International Jew, a strongly anti-Jewish book which had earlier been serialized in his newspaper, the Dearborn Independent.

Father Coughlan

In the 1930’s Father Charles Coughlan.. an independent-minded Catholic priest with a radio program which was heard by millions, spoke out strongly against Jewish political scheming, until he was silenced by an order from the Vatican.

But by the war’s end the Jews had fastened their grip so tightly on the media that dissent against their policies was denied any large-scale public hearing. No major newspaper, motion picture company, radio broadcasting network, or popular magazine was left in the hands of their opponents. Individual voices were raised in opposition, but they were effectively drowned out by the massed power of the media either under Jewish control or subject to Jewish financial pressure.

Other institutions besides the news and entertainment media had been subverted by the Jews, among them all the Christian churches, the two major political parties, and a number of the most influential social organizations (such as the various Masonic groups) and philanthropic agencies (such as the Ford Foundation). Some of these institutions, most notably the Christian churches, already contained in themselves the seeds of racial destruction and required relatively little effort to be brought into alignment with Jewish schemes. Others (the Ford Foundation is a striking example) were infiltrated, taken over, and turned in a direction diametrically opposite to that intended by their founders.

Profound Moral Illness

In the final analysis, however, none of these things changes the fact of profound moral illness on the part of the White populations of the Western nations in the postwar era. It is an illness with roots deep in the past, as has been pointed out in earlier installments, but in postwar America it bloomed.

It is difficult to analyze the witches’ brew and place exactly the proper amount of blame on each ingredient. There was the trend toward an ever more vulgar and dishonest democracy, which began well before the war and reached a new depth with the advent of Franklin Roosevelt on the national political stage in 1932.

There were the loss of rootedness and the concomitant increase in alienation stemming from the greater mobility of a motorized population.

There was the powerful new propaganda medium of television, with its frightening ability to mesmerize and manipulate.

But it was the unspeakably atrocious crime of the war itself and its effect on those who participated in it which served as the catalyst, causing all the elements to react with one another, and the disease itself to metastasize.

The evil spirit of the immediate postwar period was, at the time, apparent only to an especially sensitive few, while most could not see beneath the superficial glitter of change and motion. One of the sensitive ones was an Englishman named Eric Blair, who wrote under the pen name “George Orwell.” His 1984, written in 1948, was a parable of a future which is now upon us, but it embodied the spirit which he saw with brilliant clarity all around him in the world of 1948. The sense of hopelessness which is beginning to well up in millions now had already overwhelmed him as he contemplated the moral condition of the great majority of his fellow men then.

The present threat to the survival of the White race is physical as well as moral: while the numerical balance of the races is shifting rapidly from White to non-White, both in the world as a whole and in most of the formerly White nations of the northern hemisphere, the average racial quality of those in the White camp is declining.

The world racial balance has shifted from 30 per cent White in 1900 to just under 20 per cent White in 1982. By the end of the next decade the world will be less than 16 per cent White. The population explosion in the southern hemisphere which is responsible for this racial shift is largely the consequence of the export of White science and technology, which have dramatically reduced death rates in Africa, India, and other non-White areas of the world.

The Immigration Danger

Much more dangerous than the population growth in non-White areas is the increasing racial pollution of White areas, primarily through immigration during the period since the end of the Second World War.

Britain, for example, has absorbed approximately two million Negro, Indian, and Pakistani immigrants into a population which was virtually all White at the end of the war. France has taken in hundreds of thousands of Indo-Chinese and North Africans; Germany has been inundated with Turks; and even in Scandinavia, dark faces from the Middle East and Africa are seen in increasing numbers on the streets of all the major cities.

In the United States the non-White invasion of the postwar period has consisted mostly of Latin Americans (12 million) and Asians (3.5 million). Nine out of 10 Latin Americans in the United States at the time of the 1980 census had entered the country since 1940 or were descendants of post-1940 immigrants. Asians increased their numbers in the United States more than 20-fold during the same period.

Increased Black Presence

But the numbers tell only part of the story. In 1940 the 175,000 Asians in the United States were concentrated in a few communities: Chinatowns in half-a-dozen major cities, and close-knit Japanese groups on the West Coast. The postwar immigrants have been dispersed in White communities throughout the country.

In the case of the Negroes, while their numbers have almost exactly doubled since the war (mostly through natural increase), their presence in the lives of White Americans has doubled many times over, as all the prewar residential, schooling, and employment patterns have been disrupted.

Postwar racial mixing has been accompanied by an enormous increase in miscegenation. Prior to the war, marriage between Whites and Blacks in the United States was nowhere socially acceptable, and it was illegal in many states. The few mulatto offspring produced were nearly always born to Black mothers and remained in the Black racial community. After the war an unrelenting propaganda brought down all legal and most social barriers to miscegenation, and the second generation of mixed-race offspring is now approaching breeding age.

Saving the Unfit

Finally, the postwar era has seen a marked increase in the tenderness of the “social conscience” in America, manifested most concretely in a huge ballooning of welfare programs. These programs have the effect of increasing the birthrate and the survival rate of the most marginal elements in the White population — not to mention their effect on the growth of the non-White population.

Thus, a dysgenic trend which may have begun in Mesolithic times or even earlier, but which remained slight in the White world until modern times, has been boosted to a truly destructive magnitude in recent decades. One notices the unfortunate and unsightly consequences of this trend in most White countries today, but nowhere more than in the United States.

Grim Recapitulation

To recapitulate the present situation of the White race:

( White geographical expansion, which was the rule for the last four centuries, has not only been halted in the 20th century, with the end of European colonialism, but it has been reversed in the period since the Second World War, with the beginning of a massive migration of non-Whites from their overcrowded and poverty-ridden lands into the still-prosperous White areas of the northern hemisphere.

( White numerical growth, which until this century was yielding a steady increase in the White/non-White ratio in the world as a whole, has been overtaken by a population explosion in non-White lands. There are now more than four non-Whites for every White living on the planet, and the ratio is shifting toward an even greater non-White preponderance at an accelerating rate.

( Social mixing of Whites and non-Whites in the period since the Second World War has resulted in a catastrophic increase in miscegenation and in the consequent blending of mixed-bloods into the “White” population, both in the United States and in Europe.

( The dysgenic effects of the 20th century’s wars have been augmented greatly by social-welfare programs which are hastening the general lowering of White racial quality.

Point of No Return

The prognosis is grave. If the present demographic trends continue unabated for another half-century, and if no sustained effort to ensure an alternative outcome is made during that time by a determined and farsighted minority of people of European ancestry, then the race whose history we have traced in these 26 installments will have reached the end of its long journey.

It may linger another century or more in isolated enclaves, such as Iceland, and its characteristic features or coloring will recur with diminishing frequency in individuals for the next millennium, but before the middle of the 21st century it will have reached its point of no return.

Then, gradually or quickly, the race which built the glory that was Greece and the grandeur that was Rome, which conquered the earth and established its dominion over every other race, which unlocked the secret of the atom and harnessed the power which lights the sun, and which freed itself from the grasp of gravity and reached out to new worlds will vanish into the eternal darkness.

Degraded Humanity

Some of its works — its languages, its science, its social structures, its machines and weapons — will fall into the hands of a different, darker race, which will use them for a while. Eventually no trace will remain, not even a memory in the minds of a degraded humanity which will have long since abandoned the upward Quest which was the unique mission of the vanished race.

And the present demographic trends will continue so long as the political, religious, and social concepts and values which presently circumscribe the thinking of the Western peoples and their leaders continue to have a determining role. For at root it is a moral defect which threatens the race’s survival.

If the will to survive existed among the White masses — if the people as a whole in any large, predominantly White country possessed a strong sense of racial identity and a sense of responsibility to the future, and if they were willing to take the necessary measures (which would require that they act contrary to the dictates of the religion to which the majority of them pay lip service) — then the physical threat could be overcome, certainly and quickly.

Non-White immigration could be halted immediately, with relatively little effort. Undoing the effects of earlier non-White immigration and of miscegenation would be a much larger task, involving major economic readjustments and undoubtedly a substantial amount of bloodshed as well, but it would be a task well within the physical capabilities of the White majority.

Last Chance at Stalingrad

These things could be accomplished, even at this late date. And once accomplished in one major country, they could be extended worldwide, though perhaps not without another major war and its attendant risks. But, of course, they will not be accomplished, because the will to survive does not exist, and has not existed in the White population of any major power since the end of the Second World War. The race’s last chance to overcome its problems in this relatively painless manner died in January 1943, at Stalingrad.

So, much will inevitably be lost during the next few decades. The population balance everywhere will shift even more rapidly toward the non-Whites, the mongrels, and the unfit. The world will become a poorer, uglier, noisier, more crowded, and dirtier place. Superstition, degeneracy, and corruption will be pervasive, even among those Whites of sound racial stock, and much of the best stock will disappear forever through racial mixing.

And repression will certainly increase everywhere: those who stand for quality over quantity and for racial progress will be denied the right of dissent and the right of self-defense, in the name of “freedom” and “justice.”

Ultimately, however, none of these losses need be decisive or even significant, frightening though they may be to contemplate now, and terrible though they may be to experience in the dark years immediately ahead. All that is really important is that a portion of the race survive, keep itself pure physically and spiritually, continue propagating itself, and eventually prevail over those who threaten its existence, even if this take a thousand years; and to ensure this outcome is the urgent task of the racially conscious minority of our people in these perilous times.

A Few Guidelines

A detailed elaboration of this task here would take us beyond the intended scope of this series, which, as stated in the prologue to the first installment, has been merely to provide for its readers a better understanding of their own racial identity. It may be appropriate, however, to conclude the “Who We Are” series by drawing on its lessons in order to set out a few very concise guidelines for addressing ourselves to the task ahead:

( The duration of the task will be decades, at the least, and perhaps centuries. History has a very great inertia; a historical process of long duration may culminate suddenly in a single, cataclysmic event, but every major development in the history of the race has had deep roots and has grown in soil thoroughly prepared for it by preceding developments. The course of history now, so far as our race is concerned, is steeply downward, and to change its direction will be no overnight matter, nor will this be accomplished by any gimcrack scheme which promises success without first building a foundation for that success, block by carefully laid block.

( The workers at the task will be only a tiny minority of the race. Any program which envisages an “awakening of the masses” or which relies on the native wisdom of the great bulk of our people — which is to say, any populist program — is based on a false vision and a false understanding of the nature of the masses. No great, upward step in all of our long history has ever been accomplished by the bulk of any population, but always by an exceptional individual or a few exceptional individuals. The masses always take the path of least resistance: which is to say, they always follow the strongest faction. It is important to work with the masses, to inform them, to influence them, to recruit from among them; but they must not be counted on for determinative, spontaneous support until after a small minority has already, by its own efforts, built a stronger force than that of any opposing faction.

( The task is inherently fundamental, and it will be accomplished only through a fundamental approach. That is to say, those who devote themselves to it must be pure in spirit and mind; they must understand that their goal is a society based on quite different values from those underlying the present society, and they must be committed wholeheartedly and without reservation to that goal; they must be prepared to outgrow all the baggage of superstition and convention inherent in the present society. Thus, the task is not one for conservatives or right wingers, for, “moderates” or liberals, or for any of those whose thinking is mired in the errors and in the corruption which have led us to the downward course, but it is a task for those capable of an altogether new consciousness of the world.

The task is a biological, cultural, and spiritual one as well as an educational and political one. Its goal has meaning only with reference to a particular type of person, and if this type cannot be preserved while the educational and political aspects of the task are being performed, then the goal cannot be achieved. If the task cannot be completed in a single generation, then there must exist, somewhere, a social milieu which reflects and embodies the cultural and spiritual values associated with the goal, and serves to pass these values from one generation to the next. The preservation of a social milieu, just as the preservation of a gene pool, requires a degree of isolation from alien elements: the longer the duration of the task, the higher the degree. This requirement may be difficult of fulfillment, but it is essential. What should be envisaged, then, is a task with both an internal, or community-oriented aspect, and an external, or political-educational-recruiting aspect. As the task progresses and both external and internal conditions vary, the relative weight given to the two aspects will undoubtedly vary as well.

No Outside Help

The task set out here is a very large one, and accomplishing it will require greater will, intelligence, and selflessness than demanded from the race in any previous crisis. The danger we face now, from the enemy within our gates as well as the one still outside, is greater than the one we faced from the deracinated Romans in the first century, the Huns in the fifth century, the Moors in the eighth century, or the Mongols in the 13th century. If we do not overcome it, we will have no second chance.

But the task of survival has always been a demanding one, just as it is an unrelenting one. We have always met its demands in the past, or we would not be here today. There is no fundamental reason why we cannot overcome the present threat to our survival, horrendous though it be, and live to face new threats in the future.

What we must do, however, is understand that all our resources in the coming struggle must come from within ourselves; there will be no outside help, no miracles. If this “Who We Are” series has helped even a few of us better understand ourselves and the resources therein, then it has accomplished its purpose.

The 26 installments of “Who We Are” will be amplified, edited, and consolidated into an illustrated book, which will be published by the National Alliance in the next few months. Watch for an announcement of its appearance in National Vanguard.

ILLUSTRATIONS

a) The democrats of the West considered the destruction of Germany in the Second World War their greatest achievement. It was, however, an act of race-suicide, the price of which is only beginning to be paid in the United States, Britain, and the other Western nations.

b) A day which will live in infamy: In the name of “civil rights,” White soldiers of the 101st Airborne Division force White schoolgirls at bayonet point into racially integrated Central High School, In Little Rock, Arkansas, on September 24, 1957.

c) Franklin Roosevelt: He personified the vulgarity, dishonesty, and irresponsibility of 20th-century democracy.