About Specialization

Let us continue on the topic of civilization and in particular (auto-) domestication. What we do when we domesticate an animal is to further one special ability of an animal, such as tasty meat in one type of cows, the ability to produce much milk in another, obedience in dogs or their ability to pull snow sleds or hunt rats or pick up the scent of cancer cells or humans buried under masses of snow, and so forth. We don’t need or want animals able to stand on their own two feet, so to speak. In fact our domestication of them to a very large degree, or even completely, ruins that ability. A milk cow let loose today, for example, would die real quick. It has been specialized in milk production so much that if she is not milked regularly this will kill her.

With humans we do the same, or we do the same to ourselves; because of civilization we automatically – unconsciously – domesticate ourselves. We have to be at least somewhat domesticated to function in this civilization to begin with, and by functioning in this civilization we become even more domesticated. We end up in a downward going spiral, until we – at one point – become completely dependent on civilization to survive and then finally unable to survive at all. And that will be the end of us, Idiocracy style.


Our hunter-gatherer forebears lived in small tribes, no larger than 144 people (called “a great dozen”). If they grew larger than that, they would split up and you would have two tribes instead. These tribes lived on their own for most of their time, away from others, but they did regularly meet at some few sacred places in Europe. I would guess that Stonehenge was such a place, but we also know of one such place in what is today the Czech Republic, and other such places surely existed too. They organized ring games (competitions), that eventually became known in historical times as the Olympic games, for example, and later as knight tournaments. They would go there to share news and other information, but also to find spouses from other tribes – to avoid inbreeding.

However, they only needed to tolerate the presence of other humans, and to socialize with distant relatives and strangers, for a short time. After these gatherings, they returned to living on their own, away from others. They remained wild and free, in natural tribes. Untamed. Everyone was family. They did not need to domesticate themselves to function in their type of society.


The (undesired) consequences of (auto-)domestication are many. We get a weaker skeleton, we get shorter faces (with teeth no longer having space to grow, like with “wisdom teeth”), we get weaker muscles, poorer joint definition, hair changes, fat accumulation, simplified patters of behaviour, more pathology, physical defects, extended immaturity and not least, we get smaller brains. Yes, we become dumber.

But people today, completely hung up in the idea of “evolution”, but too unintelligent to understand that theory, often believe that we are better today than we were before. “We have to be, because we have evolved so much since the Stone Age, right?” We live longer and we are capable of so much more – as proven by our high tech (the advanced wheelchair I talked about when I wrote about Civilization).

In reality we only live longer on average thanks to modern medicine (and other modern sciences), completely at odds with Nature and what is good for us – and we are so incapable that the only way we can get anything at all done is through specialization.

Now, this is a positively charged word, don’t you agree? “Specialization”. It means that each and every one of us becomes a specialist in something. Not necessarily something glamorous, it can be a specialist toilet cleaner, but still: a specialist. The term itself suggests, I think, that we at least perform one single task well, and better than our pre-agricultural forebears, who were all jacks-of-all-trades. But….

Ah, yes. There is a “but” here. You see, when you look at historical sources, describing the performances of our forebears, and when you look at archaeological evidence, and not least the first books written, you realize that this is not the case at all. Yes, we specialize, we educate each and every one of us to become an efficient (hopefully?) cog in a great machinery, able to perform one single task well (dentist, driver, computer programmer, soldier, psychiatrist, teacher etc.), and some of us are indeed skilled in other tasks too, but even though we specialize, and pour all our energy into mastering that one single skill or lore, we fall short compared to our forebears.

Historical records tell us how the city of Athens, that had even been civilized for some time by then, could produce thousands of rowers able to row faster and for longer than our Olympic rowing champions are able to today. Fossilized footprints in the sand can tell how the average Stone Age man could run faster than our Olympic champion runners and world-record holders can. And they didn’t even have running shoes on when they did, and ran along sandy beaches. Our average Stone Age forebear could throw a spear farther than our Olympic javelin champions can throw a javelin. And yes, the same average Stone Age forebear could do all these things that well, whilst we can only produce specialists able to compete with him in one single task. And it doesn’t stop there. They average Stone Age man was also intellectually superior to our biggest geniuses.

Now, I don’t claim to be one of our biggest geniuses, but if you take my own role-playing game, MYFAROG, as an example, you could say that I have specialized in making such a game, and therefore I am able to. I have written a comprehensive rule system that makes sense and covers all eventualities in the setting, and that can be used for role-playing. But I had to write it down. I don’t remember everything in the rule-book by heart. A Stone Age forebear of mine would have been able to not only come up with such a system, but also he would not need to write it down. He would memorize it and everything in it. His players would not need character sheets, because they would easily remember all their stats and XP and whatnot, and changes to them as well. I might think highly of myself for making such a game, but I am but a shadow of my forebears.

They would memorize the position of the stars at different times of the year, learn all the properties of plant from their parents, without the need for any books, tell stories to each other that would make even Tolkien envious, and then those who listened to them would hear it once and be able to retell the same stories to others later on. And so forth. Our “great potential” was lost, because of agriculture and civilization. Or at least greatly diminished.

You think I exaggerate? Maybe I do, but I don’t think so, and if you look at Europe, the average IQ has dropped here by 15 points the last 100 or so years already – and no, it’s not all due to immigration from low-IQ populations in the third world. And the physical achievements of our forebears are well documented.

Even in the 19th century, we had for example a Norwegian author, Peter Andreas Munch, who went to the Vatican to read a book. He was not allowed to take notes or to take the book away from the Vatican library, but he simply went there and read the book, and then went outside and wrote what he had read down on paper. Yes, he could memorize what he had read, and then write it down afterwards. Even only a few generations ago, people were on average much smarter than people are today. The decline in intellectual abilities is dramatic! My father had to learn and were able to learn a lot more when he became an engineer, than my brother did, some 22-23 years later. Some time in the 90ies a class of engineers in Norway were given an exam from the late 70ies, because their professor had not had the time to make one himself, so he just used an old one that he was convinced they could not have seen before, and every single engineer student failed the exams, and filed complaints that it was too hard. Not one of them passed. Now, this can of course also be attributed to a decline in the education in Norway, but this changes nothing, because why is education declining in Norway? The answer is the same: because people in general are becoming dumber. When the students today can’t pass a single test and fail all their exams, then they… simply make the tests and exams easier. This applies to all subjects today in the educational system, even mathematics and biology.

And speaking off; even the scholars of the 19th century were not specialized like scholars are today. They would be experts in a wide field of subjects, whilst today’s scholars are just poorly educated, according to their limited intellectual abilities, in one single subject.

So no, the specialization that came from civilization is not something positive. It had to come, because modern man has become so useless that the only way he can become useful is by focusing all his energy into learning to perform one task somewhat well, so that he can make a living and be somewhat useful for society. As you know painfully well, most of us aren’t even able to perform that one task very well though. In fact, many so-called experts today are barely trained to look up questions in their field of expertise online. If the web went down, so would their knowledge and competence. A modern repairman no longer repairs anything. He just replaces broken parts with new parts.

It’s because of Capitalism, yes, I agree, but this is a part of civilization, a consequence of it, and follows in the wake of its intellectual destruction – of our auto-domestication. In fact, it’s a good example of how we domesticate ourselves and ensure that we become only increasingly dumber.

When mankind adopted agriculture and developed civilization he basically took a dive from a cliff. At first it went well – he was flying! But as he falls he picks up speed and we are currently heading at full speed towards the ground. It doesn’t help to close your eyes. If you see what is coming or not is irrelevant. You will soon hit the ground regardless. And be smashed against the sharp rocks below.

The only parachute we have, that can save us? I will discuss that another day….

Thank you for reading.


P. A. Munch:

Image result for Peter Andreas Munch

About Civilization

High technology, superior art, great temples, great achievements and even great empires. It’s all a result of civilization, and casting aside civilization would be a waste of potential. Right?

To answer that, the first question we need to ask is: where and why did civilization appear?

Where did they first appear? The oldest civilizations were located in the Middle East and North Africa, in the Fertile Crescent, the meeting point between Africa, Europe and Asia.

Why did they appear? When the humans of Africa, Europe and Asia met they also mixed. The peoples perfectly adapted for life in Africa mixed with the peoples perfectly adapted for life in Europe and Asia, and the result was a hybridized man not perfectly adapted for life anywhere. They had no natural habitat, because they were a cross between peoples from vastly different places.

They were hardly complete failures, surely they too could hunt and survive, but not as well as those perfectly adapted to their environment. So instead more and more of them resorted to agriculture. I may add that Europeans too resorted to agriculture some times, in the Stone Age, when they had no other choice, so this was not a new idea. This was how they had done it in the past, when things went wrong. However, they always cast aside agriculture again when they could, because they understood and felt that living as hunter-gatherers was better. The hybrids in the Middle East though kept it, and with time agriculture almost close to completely replaced hunting and gathering.

This however didn’t repair their problem with not having any environment perfectly adapted for themselves. On the contrary, agriculture made it even worse. Their farmer diet made their jaws shrink (which is why people today no longer have room for their “wisdom teeth”), their skeletons became weaker, their brains shrunk and they even became more “slave-minded”.

Let me elaborate on that a bit, before we continue: with agriculture came malnutrition (because their diet became less varied), slavery (because some people took control of the land and needed workers), war (because when famine struck one place, they tended to just go to another place and take their food instead, by force) and tyranny (because one guy always took control of it all). So in order to survive in these farmer areas of the Middle East/North Africa, most people had to be obedient, even submissive. You also didn’t need very much intelligence: your local tyrant gave you what you needed to survive, in return for your slave-service in the fields.

Yes, this is how social classes appeared. They had no such division as hunter-gatherers, it was not needed at all, and would have been just a destructive nuisance. Free peoples don’t have social classes. But in the farmer areas some people ruled, others slaved and some got their food by enforcing slavery.

I can add that the English term “Lord” actually means “Warden of the Bread”, from Old English hleward (“bread-warden”). He was that tyrant who kept and distributed the bread to his warriors and slaves. The Lord. You don’t do as he wishes? No bread for you…

These increasingly inadequate human beings built larger and larger communities, because although inferior to the hunter-gatherer diet, the farmer diet allowed them to feed many more. And voila! Civilization appeared, as a result of agriculture! They built entire towns to house the tyrant and his administration, surrounded by the farms of his slaves/workers. The hybrids constructed an artificial environment for themselves, because they didn’t fit in perfectly in any natural environment.


You are right though: no hunter-gather ever invented combustion engines, satellite navigation systems, advanced computers or anything like that. You can argue that they didn’t because they were “primitive” and because we are so much smarter than them, but you would be wrong to think so. Our hunter-gatherer forebears were not only stronger than us and had more powerful bones, but they also had bigger brains and were smarter than we are today.

Let me explain….

All this advanced technology that we surround ourselves with today, not only is it unsustainable, considering the amount of resources – often finite resources – we need to spend to make them, but it is basically like a wheelchair. Not just a simple wheelchair that needs to be pushed by someone. No! A high tech, fancy wheelchair with suspension, electric engines and inflatable tyres, sure.

Driving around in a modern wheelchair like that is probably fun, but you don’t invent such a thing unless you need one. Yeah. If you can walk, you wont build yourself any type of walking aids to begin with. And this is the core of the problem: our forebears could walk, but because we become increasingly unable to walk on our own two feet, we keep inventing all these different types of walking aids. Not because we are smarter than them, but because we become more and more dependent on such aids.

The wheelchair is just an example, of course: this applies to everything we invent or invented, to help us survive. Even a script was such a “wheelchair”. When asked by the Romans why the Gauls didn’t have a script of their own, letters to write down things with, the Gauls replied that they didn’t want to reduce their ability to remember. They argued that if you got used to writing down things, then you would no longer need to remember it, and therefore you would become more and more incapable of remembering – in the end anything. You would become more stupid.

Would you even want a book to write things down in, if you knew you could remember everything you wanted? What a waste! History, mythology, heraldic, herb lore, geography, etc. etc. etc. all remembered by heart and taught to others orally. Yeah, they Gauls could “walk”. They didn’t need this “wheelchair”. Not because they were inferior to the Romans, but actually because they were superior to the (more civilized….) Romans.

And yes, they were inferior to the Gauls because they were more civilized.

But in reality the inferior often beats the superior, as history has shown us over and over again, because quality is no match for treachery, lies, deceit and often also quantity. Alas! Civilization is a horrible and destructive force, but it spreads like fire in dry grass.


When we then enter the topic of “wasted potential” it starts to become more interesting, I think. Because what defines a “great achievement”? Walking on the Moon? Modern computers? Atomic bombs? Combustion engines? Sky scrapers? What?

You can justly argue that all such things are great achievements, but have you calculated in the costs of these achievements? Is it worth to degrade our species to such a degree as we have done by now, with civilization, to achieve that? Is it worth to risk our own destruction – through a slow suicide by degeneration and eventually starvation due to a devastated environment on Earth (caused by our civilization itself!) – for such things?

As part of this civilization we have something called auto-domestication, where we basically domesticate ourselves more and more, as time goes by. Yes, this is what cause the weakening of our skeleton and the reduction in brain size. We have seen it happen in all the animals we domesticated, and we see it happen in ourselves too. Compare one of those little rat-like dogs women carry around in their purses today or a bulldog or something like that to a wolf, and you get an idea of how we have become compared to our forebears. Because of auto-domestication.

Had we instead created and kept a system where we would have seen a gradual improvement of our species over the ages…. that would have been a great achievement. Sounds like an Utopian idea, right?

Except it isn’t. That’s what we had, when we were hunter-gatherers…. we cultivated courage, kindness, honesty, intelligence, loyalty, strength, speed, skill and beauty/health.

Despair not! Many of us still do, but they fight an uphill struggle, because they still auto-domesticate themselves, by living in an agricultural civilization. Let me give you an example: we still have hunters who opt to use bow and arrow instead of a modern rifle. Why? Solely because it’s more challenging. They pick the hard route to their goal. They elect to do it the hard way. This is still, thankfully, in our Native European spirit: to walk uphill even when we don’t have to, simply because we want to challenge ourselves and improve. We are broken by civilization, but not that broken, and not completely broken. Yet.

So you might say that throwing away Moon journeys and fancy fast cars with air condition, and all else that technocrats love to think might come in the future, is a wasted potential, but look instead at yourself, and understand that you have potential too, as an individual and we as a species. Is it not a wasted potential to throw away your ability to walk only because high tech wheelchairs exist, and you really want to keep the one you have? Is it not a wasted potential to throw away your ability to remember the exact position of all the stars on the night sky, only because you can download some software telling you the same?

But now you must listen carefully to what I say: Is it not a wasted potential to throw away your ability to not be greedy, envious, petty, hateful, dishonest and coward?

The greatness of man does not lie in his ability to make fancy high tech wheelchairs, but in his ability to walk!

See the source image


We can still walk. Yes, we have driven wheelchairs for thousands of years now, metaphorically speaking, but we have not yet lost our ability to walk. At least not all of us. This civilization was imposed on us, we didn’t create it. We never needed it. Others did, yes, but we – Native Europeans – did not – and we still don’t. Nor do the Native Africans or the Native Americans need it. Probably not the Native Asians either, although I am not sure if any of them are left, as such. They are all very mixed by now.

Only hybrids need civilization to survive, because they are not adapted to survival in any natural habitat. Civilization is their (artificial) habitat. Without it, they wont survive in the long run.

Civilization isn’t going away though, anytime soon, and more and more people become hybridized. This is an inevitable consequence of having an artificial habitat where everyone can survive. In the end, everyone in this civilization will be hybrids. Everyone will depend on its survival. Everyone will need civilization in order to survive….

Yes, either civilization goes away, or we go away. That’s your options, “Men of the West”.


This brings us to the topic of survival. Because the only way mankind, as a species, can survive civilization is by letting civilization destroy itself and everyone in it. Only those who elect to not participate, only those who elect to live not as a part of civilization, can stand any hope of survival – and they must survive not only the intrusions of civilization, but also its probably dramatic fall.

And a dramatic fall will come, in one way or the other. When many live cramped together, like humans do in cities, viruses will mutate a lot, and it is only a matter of time before one so deadly it will kill everyone will come from this – bred by our civilization itself. Like a self-destruct mechanism for a cancer on planet Earth. If that doesn’t happen soon enough, civilization will collapse under the weight of all the problems it creates: idiocracy, desertification, crime and not least a lack of resources – especially finite resources. A massive solar storm would also send it into absolute chaos, or a nuclear war. Or something (by most people) unexpected, like a new Ice Age. Only death awaits for the civilized man and his cancerous civilization. Degeneration, decay, destruction and ultimately death.

What hope does mankind have then? We have hope in those who might survive the coming fall. Before the collapse they balance on a thin edge, over a vast sea of disaster, because they must not be noticed by the civilized man, lest the masses will drag them down; throw them in prison for “thought crimes”, take their children from them, steal their food or even kill them. They must learn to endure hardship before hardship has come. They must become able to survive without civilization, whilst they at the same time LARP as NPCs, so that nobody notices what they are doing. They must become autonomous without anyone knowing they are. They must fake misery, when everyone else are suffering as it all comes crashing down on top of us all. Most importantly, they must stay unmixed, when everyone else mixes, or else they will not even be able to survive in the natural habitat that will replace the artificial habitat of civilization.

Yes, we have little hope, but a little is better than no hope, and Óðinn is to fight and never give up!

The gods help those who help themselves! So let us. Heill Óðinn!

Gender & Homosexuality in Norse Culture

Liberals today use Norse mythology and our heritage to justify their LGBT+ agenda. For legal reasons I will not argue against their agenda here, but I will show you how here they err in this context.

The common misconceptions they have are Loki’s assumed “genderfluid” role as a mare, giving birth to an eight-legged horse, Þórr’s “cross-dressing” when he tries to regain his hammer, and Óðinn’s sorcery (seið), learned from a goddess and that also involves cross-dressing and that therefore was seen as unmanly, according to Christians.

They also refer to a Norse term, ergi, which they believe to mean “homosexuality”.

They also refer to Gudmundar Saga, where there is talk about the rape of a man, involving no shame for the rapist, and only shame for the rape victim.


See the source image

Let’s take the last thing first. Gudmundar Saga. This is not the full name of that saga, so let us first call it by it’s real name: Prestssaga Guðmundar byskups. This translates approximately as “The Priest Saga of the Bishop Gudmund”, who died in 1237 on Iceland.

Iceland was converted to Christianity in the year 1000, and as the title of the saga in question suggests, this was not a saga about Pagans in a Pagan Iceland. This was a saga about Christians in a country that had officially converted to Christianity some 200+ years before, and 300+ years before the saga was written, much of it in a Benedictine School of writing, I may add (so at least much of it was written by Benedictine monks).

The opinions and world view in that saga are wholly that of the Christian monks who wrote it, and not that of the Pagan society that had existed 300+ years before. This is also the only saga where anything like this is written about.

It is clear that many places, even in Europe, a man is not considered to be homosexual if he rapes another man. It is not considered to be homosexual to “give”, but only to “receive”. This however is not and has never been the case in Scandinavia, where both the “giver” and the “receiver” are considered to be homosexual. Therefore, for example, you find no sexualized violence in Scandinavian prisons, because the rapist would have been seen as a homosexual just as much as the rape victim – and yes, that would have been seen as extremely shameful for him. The last thing you want to be in a prison, save perhaps except a rapist, is a homosexual. They are not treated well by the other prisoners at all, so to speak. Outside of modern liberals, there is and never was a culture of or tolerance for homosexuality in Scandinavia.

Ergi translates as “immoral lust”, “fornication”, “madness”, “anger” and “evil (or “bad force”)”. The verb ergjast, from the same root, means “become unmanly”, “become weak” or simply “weaken”, known from the Norse proverb: Svá ergjast hverr sem eldist (“Every man who grows old grows weak”).

The term still exists in modern Norwegian ergelig, meaning “annoying”, “irritating” or “vexatious” and ergre, “to annoy” etc. It appears in modern Icelandic as ergeligur, meaning “to seem irritable” or “to appear irritable”.

David F. Greenberg, who did the original studies on this, concludes that only the “taker” was ergi (“had immoral lust”), and not the giver, but he comes to this conclusion based on a Christian saga written at least partly by Benedictine monks 300+ years after Iceland was Christianized. I don’t see how this should prove anything in relation to Pagan Scandinavia, or Pagan Iceland.

Then we arrive at the first mentioned group of arguments they have, with reference to different myths in the Norse mythology. Their problem is that they take the myths literally, when we know they are actually metaphorical, filled to the brim with kenningar (“metaphors”). They come to their conclusions because they don’t understand the myths, their meaning or purpose; they don’t understand what the deities represent or indeed what a Norse deity is to begin with.

As demonstrated in our Paganism Explained series, and as demonstrated by Marie Cachet in her The Secret of the She-Bear, our mythology revolves around reincarnation. When the deities return to life, when they reincarnate, they need the mother to panic, to become afraid, at the end of the birth. As the term suggests, it is related to the deity Pan, known in Norse mythology by the name Víðarr and Loki. This is adrenaline, or what causes adrenaline to come. Called Panic.

The myth about Loki changing into a mare and giving birth to Sleipnir, is a myth describing the pregnancy and it’s end. The Ettin mason hired to build a wall is the womb, building the foetus, with help from a horse, the placenta. After some time “the building of the wall” (the pregnancy) has to end, for the child to be born, and this is where adrenaline, Loki, comes in, provoking the birth and thus getting rid of the placenta.

It is even suggested in the myth, that fear is what drives Loki to take action. The other deities threaten to beat him to death unless he does something. Terrified, he… panics, and does his job.

No, they did not know about adrenaline, but they knew about the feeling caused by adrenaline, and they knew about fear and panic, and how important this was for the woman to give birth. And no, Loki is not “genderfluid”. Adrenaline, fear and panic, has no sex. Both men and women, young and old, can panic.

The “cross-dressing” of Þórr is a myth about how Ettins have stolen his hammer, and he needs to get it back. To do so, he needs to pretend to be Freyja. Again, it’s a myth about reincarnation. Þórr is the spark of life, his hammer is his beating heart, life itself. He is dead, and needs to be reborn. So he travels to the Ettins, the womb, in form of a fertilized egg: the male deity Þórr as Freyja (“[female] seed [i. e. egg])”. There he eats and drinks greedily, in order to grow as a foetus, and when he is finally ready to be reborn, he grabs his hammer and kills the Ettins. Note that when a child is born and starts to breathe, when his heart starts to work sans assistance from the mother, this “kills” the placenta. Also, when still a foetus, the child has no sex. It is neither male nor female. It will become a male or a female later on in the pregnancy.

Note that he is accompanied by Loki, adrenaline, panic, because he cannot be reborn and get his heart back without him!

This has nothing to do with cross-dressing…

Then their final piece of evidence: Óðinn’s “shameful” female sorcery. You can read what I said about Sorcery, to know more about this, but first let me explain a few things: when a woman is pregnant and is ready to give birth, she is assisted by midwives. Women who dress in white robes, wise women, known as the Norns in Norse mythology, able to examine the placenta and by doing so tell if the child will suffer from this or that illness in life, or have this or that quality in life (they are thus called “goddesses of destiny”, not because they give a destiny to the child, but because they can predict it, by analysing the placenta after birth).

Well, they were the midwives alright, but in Pagan Europe they also had something called the midwives of the mind. Yes, we know this from Ancient Greek philosophy as maïeutics – commonly known as “the Socratic method”. As you can understand, the term comes from the goddess Maïa, the midwife of the gods. The midwives of the mind of the ancient world are commonly known as the Druids today, and they dressed in white robes, just like “real” midwives. Yes, they were taught about midwifery from the goddess of midwifery, Maïa…

This is the “shameful” midwifery of Óðinn – the god of the mind in Scandinavia. As I explain in my blog post about Sorcery, this has nothing to do with homosexual practises and it is not shameful at all, save perhaps in Christian eyes. It was not unmanly to be a Druid.


So as you can see, all their evidence is rubbish, and proves only that they are ignorant and have zero understanding of our Native European heritage. Our Pagan forebears were not “cross-dressers”, they did not approve of “genderfluid” people and they did not see homosexuality as anything but shameful. As you can tell from Tacitus’ “Germania”, supported by archaeological finds, our forebears actually even executed what they called “degenerates” (homosexuals), by smashing their skulls, cutting their throats, strangling them and then finally throwing their by then rather dead bodies into bogs.

They can argue for their liberal world view as much as they want, but they can not rightfully take the world view of our pre-Christian Scandinavian forebears as support for their own world view. In fact, their modern world view crashes fully, totally, utterly and completely with the world view of the Ancient Scandinavians.


Proto-Nordic *saiþaR means “tradition” or “sorcery”, but upon entering the Viking Age this term had branched into Norse seiðr (“sorcery”) and siðr (“tradition”). Originally though, both sorcery and tradition was the same. Perhaps is this branching evidence of the decreasing ability of farmers (as opposed to the intellectually superior hunter-gatherers) to pass the tests, so one part of the Tradition became esoteric whilst the other one remained exoteric. One became “sorcery” and the other one remained the everyday beliefs and festivals and traditions, sans any deeper understanding.

The English term sorcery as well as proto-Nordic *saiþaR are believed to derive from the same PIE root *sêr-, meaning originally “lot”, “fate” or “give sign”, or even just “signs”.

See the source image

The sorcerer would carry a sacred bough, a sorcerer’s staff, called a gandr, from proto-Nordic *ga-anda-, meaning “animate” or actually “give breath to”. He himself was the forebears reincarnated, a god, Óðinn, and like the placenta (the world tree) transfers knowledge from the forebears to the foetus via the umbilical cord, he would sit under a sacred tree and transfer knowledge to others from the sacred tree and himself via his sorcerer’s staff. He would help them “give birth to themselves”, like a midwife of the mind, to reincarnate, by “giving them signs”. This was his sorcery.

For a person to find himself the sorcerer would present different signs and then see if the person would recognize them, or be able to find the right combination of signs. If he did he would ask the person for a password, that only the sorcerer would know, directly from the mouth of the person in the grave, or passed on from a sorcerer who had, some times many generations ago. The rightful person would be able to recognize the right signs and the right combination of signs and be able to remember this secret password, just by having been presented with these signs. They would remind him of his password, and thus the sorcerer could tell if this was indeed the right person – if it really was the person in the grave, having come back to life.

The signs could be songs, runes or stanzas, but he also used physical objects for this purpose. These objects were either “false” items or items linked to the individual that was to reincarnate. The latter would be collected from the grave of the person who was going to reincarnate. This was the purpose of burying the dead with their most precious items: so that they could recognize and remember themselves in the next life. The “false” items were present just to allow the sorcerer to test the person. If a person was to reincarnate he would recognize the items he had known in his previous life, and would then not pick a similar “false” item as his own when he was to recognize himself. Only the real person would be able to tell the difference between e. g. two different swords, one “false” and one he actually owned in his previous life.

If a person “recognized himself” in this manner, the sorcerer would help him remember himself, by means of this sorcery. He would re-animate the dead, so to speak, in a new body. He would discover his lot in life, his fate, by means of sorcery.

See the source image

The Charade

The term “god”, Norse góð, from proto-Nordic *guda, means simply “good”, but the original meaning of the term is “what you conjure” or “what you with spells/sorcery control”. It’s a force of nature that the sorcerer can command (so it’s good [god] for you). A sorcerer was called góði (“god”) and a sorceress gýðja (“goddess”). Any force of nature that the sorcerer/sorceress could conjure was a “god/goddess”.

The deities were named according to their attributes or their powers, their function or their roles, such as Óðinn (“to blow, “to inspire”, “spiritually arousing”), Freyja (“[feminine] seed [i. e. the egg])”, Freyr (“[masculine] seed [i. e. the spermatozoid]”), Baldr (“shining white”), Týr (“beam [of light]”), Þórr (“thunderer”), Jörð (“earth”), Höðr (“hide”, “hood”), Heimdallr (“tree above the bed”, “world tree”), Máni (“wanderer”, “measure”), Njörðr (“thirst from below”), Forseti (“front seat”, “judge seat”, “feast”), Sága (“seek [knowledge]), Skaði (“jump”, “climb”), Sól (“shining”, “giver”, “safe”, “health”), Váli (“fallen”, “chosen”, “strong”, “power”), Viðarr (“wood”, “wide forest”), Íðunn (“laborious”, “industrious”), Loki (“lightning”, “flash of light”), etc.

Yes, the conjurer became the god/goddess he/she conjured. He/she was a góði/gýðja.

So as you can see, the concept of “god” was not the same as most people have today. The divine was not “supernatural”. The divine might hold powers we today have forgotten to connect to or don’t understand any more, but all of it is perfectly natural. Yes, there is nothing supernatural about the divine.

When you believe that they saw them as supernatural beings that they “worshipped”, like the Abrahamists worship their Hebrew idol, you fall into the trap sat up for the uninitiated. Yes, this is the impression you can get from ancient descriptions of our Tradition. Yes, it all seems supernatural, and superstitious. But this is a charade.

The charade, the ginn, (“charade”), is set up not to deceive people for no good reason, but as a means to test and to educate them. So the Tradition is not just a Tradition, but a Tradition divided into different levels of understanding; the exoteric and the esoteric. Some will remains inside Plato’s cave, and believe the shadows dancing on the wall in front of them are “real”. Others will turn around and see what causes the shadows to dance on the wall. They will leave the darkness of the cave and become…. elevated to the divine. You will fall down screaming, and pick up the runes (secrets) from the green grass. Yourself given to yourself.

Runes in the Green Grass

Our forebears were wild and free; nomadic savages living as hunter-gatherers – for hundreds of thousands of years. But as we know, at one point this changed, first with the advent of agriculture and then with civilization. Agriculture meant domestication of animals, but also auto-domestication. As a result we saw a decline in the physical and intellectual capabilities of our forebears. Not only did their skeletons grow thinner and weaker, but their brains shrank too, and they became dumber. Before this decline, everybody passed the tests and found back to themselves, but the auto-domesticated farmer every now and then failed, and remained in “Plato’s cave”, so to speak. With time more and more farmers failed the tests, and with the advent of (semi-) civilization the auto-domestication accelerated dramatically, and so did the decline in man’s intellectual and physical capabilities. In Classical Antiquity only a select few passed the tests and became divine. The rest kept on “believing Santa Claus is real”, so to speak. Yes, in the end, a majority knew only the exoteric Tradition; only the charade intended to help them find back to themselves. And thus they did not find back to themselves…

Yes, when we see books written about our heritage, even those written in Classical Antiquity, we need to keep this in mind. We see a description of the exoteric Tradition. The charade…. In the background sat a select few, keeping the esoteric Tradition to themselves. Only they had passed the tests. Only they were divine.

When the Romans murdered the Celtic druids, the Celtic heritage fell into shadow. Ignorance. When the Judeo-Christians murdered the rest of the European Pagan spiritual & intellectual elite, some as late as in the 18th century, the same happened to the rest of Europe. Our Tradition fell into shadow.

What remained was the charade, the seemingly silly belief in “Santa Claus”, incomprehensible and mystic elves, gods & goddesses. Þórr riding his wagon across the sky, Óðinn riding an eight-legged horse, Loki transforming into a fly, Freyja crying tears of gold, etc. etc. etc.

My task is to help you find back to the meaning. To help you open your eyes and find the runes in the green grass, to read them and to understand them. Ideally on your own.

From the Depths of Mímir’s Well

Part I

Many don’t like what we say about our heritage, because it doesn’t fit their agenda or their own personal opinions and because it doesn’t fit with what they have been taught about this from scholars. They attack us armed with: “Sources?”, to suggest that we just made this up ourselves and have nothing to back it up. When we give them our sources, they tend to claim that our sources aren’t good enough. Either that, or we hear nothing more from them.

What most people seem to think when they ask for sources is for references to somebody else saying the exact same. A renowned scholar, that is. If no renowned scholars say the same as you, then you have no source, they claim, and what you say can be easily brushed under the carpet.

Another problem we face is the reluctance in people to admit that we might know more than them, even if just about a limited subject. Instead of bowing down to superior knowledge they bow down to envy. When they cannot argue against what we say using facts, they resort to ridicule and name calling.

The final problem I will address here is the fact that many simply cannot fathom that we are able to know the answers to these riddles at all. Why would we know that!? What makes us think we know better than scholars who have studied these subjects for hundreds of years!? What arrogance!

Part II

The sources we use are the primary sources. Yes, for understanding what the mythology tells us, we use (big surprise) the mythology as our source. Yes, for understanding what the fairy tales tell us, we use the fairy tales as our source. Etc. When the language is hard to understand we use dictionaries, such as Hjalmar Falk & Alf Torp’s “Etymologisk Ordbog over det norske og danske Sprog”. A scholarly book about the roots of the words and their original meaning.

These are our sources…. the original sources and dictionaries. That’s all we need. I am sorry, if this doesn’t satisfy your need for sources, but we cannot use any such scholars as a source because they don’t know what the myths or anything else related to our heritage mean. Amazingly, I agree, but true: they have no clue!

Which leads us to the next point, namely that the scholars have studied this for hundreds of years, and still have not been able to understand what this is all about. They have not even come close to the truth. How is this even possible? Yes, I agree. It sounds unlikely, but it’s actually true, and I explained why it is so in Dissent, Truth & Paganism.

Then to the topic of Marie and her ability to understand what scholars have failed to understand for hundreds of years. How could she be able to decipher this? How can you even believe that she is right and the scholars of Europe for hundreds of years are wrong? How is this even possible?!

Well, the truth is that I don’t need to convince you that she is right, because you can tell for yourself that she is, by studying the original sources using the key she gave you in The Secret of the She-Bear. When you apply this key to the myths and fairy tales, to pretty much any and all myths and fairy tales, you are able to at least partly understand what they mean. From Ancient Egypt to Japan, from Ancient Greece to Scandinavia, from Ireland to Russia. Even the New World myths can be deciphered, using her key. It all fits.

Now, had I interpreted a myth to be a cake recipe, and made sense of it, you could smile and tell me that I was clever to do that, but I cannot use the same key to unlock the meaning of other myths. So you would be able to claim that this is not the actual meaning of the myth, and you could brush my interpretation off as irrelevant. I agree. But if I told you – like Marie does – that these myths are instructions for how you can reincarnate, and I showed you how to interpret any and all myths in this context, then it is impossible to honestly brush what I say off as irrelevant. I can show you how each and every myth and fairy tale is such an instruction. The key fits into all the keyholes, so it is impossible to claim that it’s not the universal key. You can tell that I am right, if you use the key on the fairy tales or myths. Only your own dishonesty can convince you otherwise.

Part III

So why is it we face critics and ridicule? If what we claim is so obviously right, why doesn’t everybody agree with us?

We return to the fact that scholars have failed to understand anything at all in hundreds of years studying these subject. They have written thousands of essays and books about how our forebears did this or that, had “fertility” cults (as if fertility was such a big problem in the past!?…), believed in an “afterlife”, etc. etc. etc. They have described our heritage from a thoroughly Judeo-Christian perspective, they have filled up every vessel, well and cavity in our heritage with pure nonsense, and have left no room for reason, sense, logic or meaning. They have turned the deepest wells into the tallest towers, the tallest towers into the deepest wells, and everything else too has been turned upside down and then covered in deep, reeking Judeo-Christian mud.

The reality of our heritage is in total contrast to the impossible, empty, childish & not least meaningless heritage they present to us, and because people have been brainwashed to worship authority, and they are the authority, people have serious problems opening their eyes. It takes time to let reality sink in. It takes courage to admit that everything you knew before was not only a lie, but a waste. A complete waste of time. It also takes some honesty and magnanimity of spirit to admit that somebody else, Marie, has found the truth, instead of you. Or me. We all search. We all want to find the truth ourselves. Especially in this age of narcissism.

It takes time to wash away all the filth our education, brought to us by the ignorant scholars, have covered our minds with. Even I, married to Marie and in possession of her key for years already, only understood for real some days ago that only the living has a spirit. Even though I have translated and written about it before, explaining how Ásgarðr is actually the world of the living (in Paganism Explained, Part V), explaining for years how spirit translates as “breath”. It takes time to let it all sink in. But in the end, I have to realize that of course…… the dead has no breath. Only the living has a breath.

Then when that has sunk in, you can also understand that “The Book of the Dead”, called by the Ancient Egyptians; “The Book about how to arrive to the Day”, was not a book for the dead to enter the “afterlife”, but a book – just like Marie has said – about how you can reincarnate. How you return “to day” and become “a spirit” (somebody with a breath, ergo somebody alive) again. It teaches you to return to life.

In addition to this we have many scholars who wish to keep the status quo, as this is the only way they can keep their authority and power over others’ thinking. If ordinary people realize that everything they teach and know is absolute nonsense, then their fancy diplomas and their “wisdom” are no longer worth anything. Instead they talk about how our heritage is “a mysterium”, and “that we can never know” etc., on order to discourage people from even trying to find out. We further have at least one billion Judeo-Christians who don’t want our heritage to resurface. They went to great lengths to bury our heritage, often literally, by building their desert cult temples right on top of our sacred sites, but also in other manners, like by ruthlessly persecuting all who knew – and even burning them alive, to keep them quiet.

Today they use other means, like slander (“Varg/Gandálfr is a cult leader”), misrepresentation (“they worship the placenta”), false labelling (“Varg is an atheist”) etc., in order to distract, to sow doubt, to ensure that people who otherwise would have been interested wont listen to us. I am not worried though. The sea of ignorance, pettiness, cowardice and dishonesty is vast, but mankind is like a clear night sky: a big vast and empty blackness, but dotted with many shining stars.

Thank you for reading

The Druid

Part I

When I write about how our mythology is an instruction on how to remember passwords, to identify and remember yourself, and how to regain the strength & wisdom you had in previous lives, I get responses from people who are disappointed. They want there to be more to it, more than “just reincarnation”. Something more “spiritual” and “deep”. Something…. impossible.

Likewise, when I write about how our deities are not what the Judeo-Christians presented them as, I get the same type of responses. People feel let down, they are disappointed and accuse me of being an atheist. Because our gods are not like the gods imagined by these ordinary men. They sought our Pagan heritage to find basically what is offered to them by Christianity: a plug to fill all the holes in their lacking world view. Miracles! A magic guy in the sky! Or rather; magic guys and girls in the sky! Something unexplainable and supernatural. Yes; something impossible.

Likewise, when I explain what prayer and sacrifice was all about, they react the same way. When I say that prayer was originally about kneeling down to sow seeds in the ground, so that the fertile soil could produce, and that looking up towards the sky was all about man looking for sunshine and/or rainfall, for the seeds they had planted in the ground, they feel let down again. When I say that sacrifice was all about showing moderation, and leaving some of what you harvested for the birds and other animals, or for the soil, we see the same. It’s all so mundane and empty, they think.

Even when I explain how the original temples were simply beautiful natural locations, most of the time centred around an old tree, left alone most of the time, for the animals to enjoy and the plants to grow in the temple area without too much meddling by human hands, they are disappointed. They don’t want to hear that the very term “temple” means “temperance”. They don’t like to hear that one of the temple’s main purposes was to teach man about the importance of moderation.

Part II

Well, I don’t understand why being able to regain all the spiritual strength and wisdom you had in previous lives isn’t “deep” enough for them. Why being able to become Óðinn himself is such a disappointment to them. All the insight they had, will be yours. The accumulation of all your forebears’ courage, charisma, loyalty, love and not least, luck, will be yours in this life, and you have the ability to add to it as well . You gain divine enlightenment, but this is not “spiritual” and “deep” enough for you!? I guess our heritage is not what is lacking here.

Our deities are not magic guys or girls in the sky, some supernatural creatures that egocentric people can pray to like Judeo-Christians do to their Hebrew idol. This doesn’t mean they are not real though. Not defining your deities by Judeo-Christian standards doesn’t make you an atheist. Óðinn is the sum of all the spiritual strength of our forebears, of all their Hamingja. A divine force. A real god. Not supernatural, but perfectly natural – as everything real is. He works through us, when we reincarnate, when we recognize ourselves. When we give ourselves to ourselves. Sorry, but no, this is not atheism. It’s not Judeo-Christianity, I agree, but no, it’s not atheism.

Prayer and sacrifice, as briefly explained above, is how you work with Mother Nature, instead of against her, and instead of trying to lift yourself up above her. You are not the master. Mother Nature is. The deities are. Give so that they can give to you. If you just take everything, every single little seed, for yourself, then Mother Nature cannot give back to you. You already took everything, and nothing comes from nothing. If you never share with her, you will suffer the lack of her abundance. Or in the end even starvation. Show moderation. If you do you can keep on building up your Hamingja, and increase your insight not just in life, but from life to life as well, via reincarnation.

Part III

In the past only the honourable were selected to be reborn. Only a select few, only about 10.000 in what is geographical Europe today, would return to life after death. Only the best; the elite. It would take thousands of years too, to be reborn. Simply because of the scarcity of kinsmen. If I recall correctly, Plato estimated it to take some 8.000 years to be reborn, in his time.

Today billions of people are alive. Possibly, more people are alive today than the total sum of people living the last million years. We can in fact imagine that everybody from the past are here now. All at the same time. The elite is still here, yes, but also all the lesser men; those with only a little bit of honour. They didn’t have to wait in line for ages, to be reborn, to be given a new chance to live Honourably. There was no longer any scarcity of kinsmen to be reborn in.

But today even our best suffers from amnesia. They have not gone through the awakening rituals of our forebears. They don’t tap into the Well of Mímir. They are not gods or goddesses incarnate. They don’t remember. They don’t have the wisdom, insight, courage, love and luck they used to have in previous lives. They are but empty vessels, filled only by the Honour they can accumulate in this life.

Thankfully, I am not entirely right here, because much of what we experience remind us and awaken our Hamingja in us, but only by chance. You come across something you knew in a previous life, and it awakens something in you. You visit Stonehenge, you see menhirs, dolmens and cairns, you visit museums and see an old armour and an axe, you read the same fairy tales, the same myths, you hear the same melodies you used to know, and so forth. But by accident, and only a little. You gain only fragments of the divine power you could have possessed, had you truly reincarnated and found back to yourself; had you become Óðinn again.

The vast majority of people alive today empty their vessels completely, instead of filling them up at least a bit in this life. They live a dishonourable life, of slavery, cowardice, betrayal, ignorance and a total lack of moderation. Even their “temples” are extravagant displays of a total lack of temperance. All the dregs of the past, people who barely did anything honourable ever, are now here and are allowed to wallow in the mud they create all around them, everywhere. Alas! They never pray, never make sacrifices, never show any moderation, never try to tap into Mímir’s Well and remain… empty human beings, void of direction and divine force.

Part IV

Yes, you already know: the best we can do in this situation is to fill the empty vessels, by awakening at least bits and pieces of Óðinn in them too, by showing them how they can, by giving them direction and divine force. Show them the sacred objects they used to own in previous lives, or at least that they saw back then. Yes, this is what I, a mere “midwife of the mind”, offer you, as I try to help you give birth to your divine self.

Courage. Wisdom. Insight. Intuition. Intelligence. Luck. Strength. Loyalty. Love. Kindness. Charisma. Generosity. Immortality through the kin and harmony with Mother Earth. Blood and Soil.

Who was the first giant in Norse mythology?

The term “giant” is a very poor translation of what is said in the mythology. The term used in Norse mythology is Jötunn (English Ettin), from proto-Nordic *etunaR, which means “hungry” or “big eater”.

Ýmir can be found in the womb of the mother, growing from the fertilized egg. He becomes the sky (amniotic bag), the placenta, the sea (amniotic liquid) and he constantly drips new Ettins (the amniotic fluid). Thus the entire world around the foetus is made from his body.

Then the gods cause a great flood (as the water goes) and cast him down into “the abyss”, as the child is born. The placenta is the twin that is “decapitated” when the child is born. He dies, but the child lives on.

He is called an Ettin because he is “hungry” and feeds off the mother. The placenta takes nourishment from the mother, and transfers it to the child. He is thus a monster, an ogre, to the mother, who has to control it, keep it in check, in order to survive the pregnancy.

Do you still don’t know enough, or what?


NB. This is a reproduction of an answer I wrote on Quora (Varg Vikernes) in July, 2019.

The WHG, EEF & WSH Origins of Europe

The three groups that modern Europeans descend from are listed by the geneticists as the Western Hunter Gatherers (WHG), the Early European Farmers (EEF) and the Western Steppe Herders (WSH).

They do their best to give us the impression that we are very mixed, of course in an attempt to make us accept their “anti-racist” agenda; more mass immigration to Europe and more admixture.

One thing I find puzzling is how many relate to this info as if the WHG lived in that part of Europe, the EEF in another, and the WSH came from today’s Ukraine and spread out. As if they just poppet out of the ground there. In the background looms the “Out of Africa” theory, suggesting that Africans migrated to Europe during the height of the last Ice Age and out-competed the Neanderthals already living there – a theory so utterly ludicrous it is only worth mentioning, because so many believe in it. But no, we already have evidence of mankind being present in Europe before, in today’s Bulgaria, and there are no evidence suggesting the Neanderthals came from Africa – or that their forebears, the Heidelbergensis, came from Africa. Any such claims are purely speculative. Remember that.

Also, the idea that these three groups were so very different from Each other is rather flawed. In reality all these groups, the WHG, the EEF and the WSH, are the descendants of the proto-Europeans; the Neanderthals. The EEF were somewhat hybridized already, at least with homo sapiens (Africans), the WSH too were somewhat hybridized, at least with proto-Asians (Denisovans) and the WHG were probably not hybridized at all, or only had some slight admixture from the Ice Age before the last one.

When a certain percentage of a population in modern Europe can be traced to the different groups, it doesn’t mean that that population is a very hybridized population though. The percentage of EEF in a population, for example, doesn’t actually mean that this is the percentage of non-European blood in that population. No, it only means that this is the percentage that population has from that particular Neanderthal population, the EEF, and that particular Neanderthal population probably had only a small percentage of non-Neanderthal blood to begin with.

E. g.

Fictional Example Population made up of:

WHG 50%

EEF 20%

WSH 30%

If the EEF and WSH population was e. g. 10% non-Neanderthal this means that only 5% (2% + 3%) of the blood in that fictional example population is non-Neanderthal. Also, if that population lived in the North of Europe, where the Neanderthal genes will be the most useful, if might well mean that of the EEF and WSH blood, only the Neanderthal part of it would survive and stay there. So in fact, my fictional example population above here, could well be like that, and still be 100% Neanderthal in origins.

Even if we say all of Europe used to be one large population, a mix between WHG, EEF and WSH, then we can easily explain how the different modern populations ended up looking so different, even if we disregard historical admixture. The populations living in Southern Europe would have had much less “weeding out” of non-Neanderthal blood after the last Ice Age ended, and the populations living in Northern Europe would have much more, perhaps a total, weeding out of any non-Neanderthal blood – and therefore ended up perfectly Nordic looking, with a 100% blue- or grey-eyed and blonde and fair skinned population. Even with ancestry back to the hybridized EEF and WSH, they would themselves not have any non-Neanderthal admixture in them.

The claim that “we are all mixed” is simply…. wild speculations. And yes, what I say here is less speculative than that, because it would make sense, from what we know about vitamin D deficiency and our natural adjustment to the environment. Any “dark” genes would not survive in the North before modern medicine, even in the warm periods in between the Ice Ages. The only reason such genes survive in Northern Europe today, is because of modern medicine; vitamin D supplements in particular.

To those who now will argue that the Neanderthals were not “Nordic looking” I will simply make a claim, that yes, I cannot prove that using any scientific sources, but still: they were obviously Nordic looking. First of all we can claim that they were because we, their descendants, are Nordic looking, secondly because if the Africans they claimed moved here became (as they claim) fair-skinned, blonde and blue-eyed after only 10.000 years in Europe, why would the Neanderthals, who lived here for 500.000 years, NOT become fair-skinned,blonde and blue-eyed? If we include their forebears, the Heidelbergensis, we can go even further, and say: why would they NOT become “Nordic” after 1.000.000+ years in Europe if black Africans supposedly became “Nordic-looking” after only 10.000 years of life here? Or if you like, 30.000 years?

The amount of non-Neanderthal admixture in a European population can be measured using simply by looking at them: how many non-Nordic features do they have? If they for generation after generation have a purely Nordic look, then we can assume that they have no admixture at all. If they look like Middle Easterners, we can assume that they have much admixture. If they look overwhelmingly Nordic, but have a few non-Nordic features, we can assume that they are overwhelmingly Nordic, but have some (almost no) admixture.

We don’t need the politicized “science” of genetics to understand this.

Finally, yes, today we don’t look exactly like the ancient Neanderthals did, but…. of course we don’t. We have changed with time, with changing climates, with agriculture, with civilization: with auto-domestication. We are still Neanderthals though, only modern ones. And yes, the Nordic looking modern Neanderthals have close to no or even no non-Neanderthal admixture.