Tag Archives: Mythology

What is WRONG with the Indo-European Invasion Myth?

Posted on by

There is plenty of evidence supporting the claim that Indo-Europeans spread out from what is today Ukraine, or the Pontic Steppes, if you like. Their language became dominant almost all over Europe, and there is ample scientific evidence proving that they had a significant impact on the genetic make-up of Europe.

So what am I talking about when I say the Indo-European Invasion theory is nothing but a myth? Why am I claiming that they did not conquer anything or anybody, and that they did not replace any populations in Europe anywhere?

Am I retarded or what?

No. As convenient as that would have been for those who believe in this myth, I am not. If you are interested in our forebears and want to understand whence we came, hear me out…

First let me address the claim that they managed to “take over” in Europe because of their superior technology. They had the wheel. They used chariots of war. They had horses. The other Europeans, the peoples they are assumed to have conquered, did not.

A chariot of war and even cavalry, is all good and well if the conditions for their use are good. Like in the Pontic Steppes. However, Ancient Europe, did not look like it does today. Most of Europe was covered in ancient forests, where the use of chariots is impossible, and even the use of cavalry is very hard. And if you do use it there, it will not give you any technological advantage over infantry. On the contrary. You are at a great disadvantage!

The parts of Europe not covered by ancient forests, were mountainous or marshland. I assume that I need not explain how the use of chariots and cavalry will not be a technological advantage in mountains, and I guess you also understand that riding chariots or horses through a bog is not very easy either.

Let me also stress that it seems as if most people today underestimate just how much marshland we had here in Europe in the past. Most of the farmland we have today, everywhere save in Eastern Europe (Ukraine, Russia and perhaps parts of Poland as well), was originally marshland, that was drained as late as in the Middle Ages! Yes, before that most of it were bogs!

Note also that the country in Europe with the most “Indo-European” (Yamnaya) genetic heritage is Norway. Even today only 3% of Norway is half-way suitable for agriculture (and thus for chariot and cavalry warfare), and the rest is made up of steep and deep fjords, boggy forests, bogs and most of all (often boggy) mountains. 97% of Norway is impassable for anyone using chariots and cavalry!

So no, the argument that they were able to conquer other Europeans because they had superior technology is worth null.

The second argument I will address is the very claim that they conquered the rest of Europe in itself. If we look at historical examples, like Alexander the Great, it took him 10 years using Macedonian infantry (!) to conquer all of Greece, Asia Minor, the Middle East, Egypt and large parts of Central Asia. In 10 years!

Yet the people believing in the Indo-European conquest myth admit that the Indo-Europeans spent 3000 years to spread from what is today Ukraine to what is today Germany. 3000 years! This further dramatically clash with the claim that they managed to conquer all others in Europe because they had superior technology. Because if they did, then why did it take 3000 years for them to conquer an area no larger than what Alexander the Great only needed 10 years to conquer!? Come on! These Indo-Euroepans must have been the most incompetent and useless warriors on this planet, if they needed that much time to conquer that!

And this brings us to the third argument they have, namely that the Indo-Europeans conquered and replaced matriarchal hunter-gatherers, who according to them had no warrior culture, but worshipped women and female gods. No manly Männerbünde. No heroic poetry. Nothing. Just a bunch of feminist sissies, basically.

Now, Alexander the Great met other warriors in battle, and defeated them, one army after the other. His men fought heroically, fiercely and skillfully, against tough opponents, all of them accustomed to and trained for warfare. And it took him 10 years to defeat them all….

Yet, the people believing in the Indo-European conquest myth want us to believe that their patriarchal, manly, warrior-worshipping and chariot-riding heroes spent 3000 years to conquer a numerically vastly inferior group of feminist sissies, worshipping a mother goddess? Seriously?!

The fourth claim I wish to address is this claim, that the other Europeans were matriarchal, and also that the Indo-Europeans basically brought our mythology, our ancient poems, our ancient symbols, our entire European heritage, to Europe. Everything from before the Indo-European assumed invasion is treated by them like worthless trash, and alien to us.

But unlike for the language claim and the genetic claim, they have zero evidence in this context. And in fact, the evidence we have tells a completely different story. We see a continuity in religious practices in Europe, all over Europe, all the way from the Neanderthals and even until today (because the Christians adopted most of that Pagan heritage, when they failed to eradicate it). Nothing changed with the introduction of the Indo-European languages. Nothing is different in this context from Indo-European-speaking Europeans and non-Indo-European speaking Europeans. Nothing in this context changed with the spread of R1 haplogroups in Europe. Nothing!

And yeah, my wife has proven this in The Secret of the She-Bear, and recently also in The Runes Finally Explained: The Germanic Book of the Dead. Which I guess is the reason why so many of the fans of the Indo-European invasion theory spend so much time to slander her and her books.

We even have physical evidence proving beyond any doubt that the pre-Christan Tradition of Europe remained the same all the way, from the Neanderthals. Even archaeology supports this claim, but also all the fairy tales and myths prove this. If you don´t believe in me, you can see for yourself, by reading my wife´s books. And if you refuse to see the evidence, then you have no argument. Sorry.

And let me end this argument, by making it perfectly clear that no, no Europeans were ever matriarchal. The other Europeans too, had the exact same world view and tradition as the Indo-Europeans did.

But I have admitted that the Indo-European language has become the most dominant of all European languages in Europe, and that they genetically influenced all of Europe dramatically. Obviously, there was no conquest. So what really happened?

Let us first ask us: what could realistically explain this?

Well, think of it this way. I am one single man. A Norwegian. And I have married a French woman and moved to France. We have 7 children. If our children each have 7 children too, then I will get 49 grandchildren. If each of them too have 7 children each, I will be the great grandfather of 343 individuals. If this continues…. after only 5 generations (150 years), a total of 117649 individuals will stem from me.

7*7 = 49

49*7 = 343

343*7 = 2401

2401*7 = 16807

16807*7 = 117649

After 10 generation (300 years) a total of 1.977.326.743 individuals will stem from me. That one single Norwegian in France… and all the males in direct male line from me will belong to the same paternal haplogroup as I do.

If I teach my kids Norwegian, and they keep doing that to their children, then Norwegian will dramatically influence the French language, and perhaps even replace French in France. And beyond too! Because of course, they are not going to all stay here in France! Or to only marry Frenchmen! They will slowly, but surely, spread out across probably all of Europe. And yeah, in 3000 years, my paternal haplogroup will probably have reached all the way to Ukraine… to the Pontic Steppes.

Yet, I did not “conquer” anything (save perhaps a single French woman´s heart), the males descending from me did not defeat anybody, they did not steal the women from anywhere, but simply married and had kids. I did not replace any religious traditions in France. The French already have the same traditions as we do in Norway.

Yeah. Conquests by blood take a long time. Just like the spread of “Indo-European” languages and blood did. Making it very likely that this is exactly how they spread out across Europe. Not by warfare. Not by killing other men and stealing their women. But by living in Europe. And again: along with other perfectly European Europeans.

So my claim is simple: the (very slow) spread of “Indo-Europeans” and their language in Europe, is because some individuals there by chance were more fertile than others, elsewhere in Europe, and therefore had more children than they did.

Before I end this, I will stress that if a large group of men came to Europe and took our women, and killed the men, it would take only a few generations, a 120 years tops, to completely replace our male lines in Europe. Not 3000 years. Not even 300 years. 120 years tops! In fact, if they did that, it would take one generation to do that. This never happened in the past!

As a curiosity, I can mention that it is estimated that more than 90% of all Norwegians, actually stem in direct line back to one single king (Olaf) from the Viking Age. Because he had many children. We pretty much all stem from him. That is how “fertility” works in the long run.

Being “fertile” is not just about being able to reproduce, physically, but also about being willing to reproduce. A normal man willing to become a father is infinitely more fertile than the most physically able man on this planet, if the latter is not willing to take the responsibility of having children. Fertility is also a mental state.

When I say that this Indo-European Conquest myth is dangerous to us, and intentionally spread by those who want to destroy Europe and everything European, this is because it works just like Christianity did: anything from before the Indo-Europeans came is treated like alien garbage, when it is in fact our heritage just as much. The will to let this part of our heritage be completely removed and replaced, is part of that Indo-European Conquest myth. They even paint our perfectly European pre-Indo-European forebears as a bunch of worthless feminist sissies, worshipping a fat goddess. Further, the idea that we are immigrants in all of Europe, save in the Pontic Steppes in the extreme East of Europe, supports the idea that (continued) immigration is ok, and especially that we are not Natives in our own homelands. The Indo-European conquest myth therefore works to deprive us of our rightful status as Natives to our own homelands. To all of Europe.

To promote our blood, our heritage, and our future, not least, we need to stop pushing this “Indo-European Conquest Myth”. We are more than just that!

Dixi.

Varg Vikernes

The Ancient Mystery Cults

Posted on by

We know of several mystery cults from the Classical world; the most famous being the Eleusian Mysteries and Mithraism. What was common to them all was that they all included an initiation using sacred objects and a mystery chamber. Another thing they had in common was that they all appeared in the civilized parts of the world.

Here I will explain what they were all about, why they appeared where and when they did, and also what the “barbarian” equivalent was – and also what the roots to all these cults were. I will also show examples of cults deriving from this that still exist today.

The first thing we need to understand in order to comprehend anything in this context, is that all the ancients believed in reincarnation, and that this was the focus of their traditions. This was the purpose of their religious efforts. When we see caves from tens of thousands of years ago, here in Europe, with petroglyphs and the footprints of 7 year-old children in the sand, we need to understand that this is the Stone Age equivalent of a mystery chamber! Inside you would find a priestess or a priest, a gate keeper, whose purpose was to test you. Not just in the “are you worthy” sense, but also in the “is it really you” sense.

The sacred objects, presented to you in this mystery chamber, had a twofold meaning: “Can you recognize the right sacred object?” (to prove it is really you!), and “Find back to yourself!” (if it is truly you, and you identify the right object). You would enter the chamber, be presented several objects, and only if you identified the right one, you would be allowed to proceed to the next chamber. A priestess or a priest would also ask you a question, that you would need to answer correctly. The ultimate question would be a sacred password, that only “the right one” would know. And yes, that password would be… your own name. You true secret name, that you possessed in a previous life, and that you told to the priestess or priest, for her or him to keep it secret until you returned.

The sacred objects would be the items you had been buried with, mixed up with several other similar items, to ensure that no “trespassers” would enter and claim your spirit. If it was really you, only you would be able to identify them correctly! Imposters would not be able to do that!

In our own day and age, a part of this ancient tradition is still partly in existence in Hinduism and Buddhism: the Dalai Lama and the Kumari are both found using this tradition.

Like I said, this tradition stems from the Stone Age. The origin lies in our Neanderthal forebears. We see clear archaeological evidence that they did the exact same, as our forebears did in pre-Christian historical Europe. Not just in Ancient Greece or Ancient Rome, but all over Europe.

A Druid, a Celtic “midwife of the mind”, with his sacred objects:

We even have some of the riddles presented to the reincarnating dead, in the Eddas, in Alvíssmál as well as Hárbarðsljóð. In fact, it is likely that most of the Edda poems were actually such riddles, but these two are absolutely obviously that. The dwarf in Alvíssmál wants to marry Thórs daughter (i. e. a mythological way of saying you want to be reborn), and has to win in a knowledge contest, but fails. Then in Hárbarðsljóð we have Thór himself who wants to cross a river (i. e. a mythological way of saying you either die or want to be re-born), and faces a ferryman challenging him to a wisdom contest.

This is how it was done: you would enter the mystery chamber, be presented with one true and several false sacred object, and if you picked the right one, you would be presented with some riddles, that you needed to solve in order to continue to the next chamber. Then you would be presented with more items, and again you had to pick the right one, and answer more riddles, before you could continue. You would only be reincarnated and be able to claim all the sacred objects as your own if you picked only the right items every time and also were able to solve all the riddles, as well as know the ultimate secret password at the end: your true name, that only the priestess or priest would know!

This was done at the age of 7, and the victorious child would ultimately leave the burial mound with all the sacred objects as well as the skull and femur of the dead, lying in the ultimate chamber.

And yes, we have actual physical evidence to support what I say here: all the way back to the Stone Age, and the Neanderthals, and all the way up into historical times, we find burial sites with remains lacking both the skulls and the femur (or they have been replaced with bear skulls and the femurs of a bear). We also find the burial sites “plundered” – which of course means simply that the person in the grave had returned to re-collect the sacred objects that were rightfully his own! He had been reincarnated!

70.000 (!) year old Neanderthal remains, from Le Regordou, in France, with the head and femur missing.

5500-year-old burial mound in Tiarp, near Falköping, in Sweden, with 12 bodies. “By chance” all missing their skulls. Naturally, the “scholars” think they have been “beheaded”. Sigh.

The image of a greedy and bearded, and rather ugly, dwarf stems from this too: the little child greedily sought his precious sacred items (often made of gold, in order to last in a grave), and then left the burial mound holding much golden items and the (often bearded, and always kind of grotesque) head of his former body victoriously above his head. As I have explained in other books, “dwarf” means “opening in the ground” too. That is, whence the child comes when he is reborn.

The “problem” with this ancient reincarnation cult though, was that it was not really for everyone. Only a select few would be able to reincarnate this way. Only a select few would even be given a burial mound to begin with! The rest?

Likewise, today, only one individual in Hinduism reincarnates as the Dalai Lama. Only one single individual reincarnates as the Kumari – although they “lose” their role as the Kumari when they start to menstruate there, and then a new one needs to be found, so in a sense several women have been the Kumari, but only one at a time.

It is still a custom in Europe though, to name your children after your dead relatives, to put images of them on the mantlepiece (where they in the past put carved wooden figurines of them or their skulls on the mantlepiece), so we should reconsider the claim I make above here. Certainly there was some sort of reincarnation for everyone, but… only some would return as deities.

Yeah, I know: we have “Pagans” today who worship the gods, make sacrifices to them and think they are real physical beings on Earth. They list historical examples of god-worship, and claim this is how you shall do it. But they fail to understand that the gods, the actual and real gods, are deities reincarnated in human beings. That is: human beings reincarnated as gods. These deities were indeed given a special treatment in the past, and were hailed as real physical gods here on Earth. Like the Dalai Lama and the Kumari still is. Yeah, they still give offerings to the Kumari…

Indeed, the Lord of any ancient Germanic society was Freyr. And Lady of any ancient Germanic society was Freyja. The head of any tribe was a god, and his wife was a goddess. They had gone through the ritual reincarnation of the deity, so… they were the deities!

And yeah, we have actual evidence supporting this claim too: even after the Christianization (i. e. the “we pretend to accept your immigrant cult in order to avoid torture and death”), they still practiced this in Scandinavia. The family head of any farmer family still was a deity. When he died his throne would remain unused until one of his sons reincarnated – not as him, but as the same deity! In order for this to happen, he would need to first kill the deity, i. e. cut a wooden idol with his sword, and then become the deity himself. We see remains of this in form of traditional “sword dances”, but of course also in the Arthurian mythology, where the sword has become stuck in the idol!

You see, when the son cut the idol, he would make a promise, to do something spectacular! This was known in Scandinavia as a “Bragi promise”, from the deity “Bragi”, meaning “best”. If he e. g. promised to “unite all the tribes in England and become king there”, then he would have to do that in order to become the deity.

However the deity was in charge here, so if the sword got stuck in the idol, and the next in line could not get it free, he would not become that deity after all! And the next in line would be allowed to try pull it out. If he too failed, then the next in line would try, etc. etc. etc. In the Arthurian myth the idol is a rock, but this is the same, and ultimately the god choses a little boy, Arthur, to become him! The myth suggests that when he manages to pull the sword form the idol, he is destined to become king, but… in reality, the one who pulled the sword from the idol had to perform the act of heroism promised by the one cutting the idol! In the case of Arthur (meaning “bear”, btw…), this would be to become king.

I can also add that the symbolism here is that the idol is the placenta, and the sword the umbilical cord, and in order to be reborn, you naturally have to “free the umbilical cord form the placenta”. If you do not, when you are born, you will die.

These real gods, these deities reincarnated in man, were given special attention by the others, yes. They were hailed as real gods. They were real gods!

They would transfer divine blessings to others by placing their swords on the shoulders of their subjects, by letting them drink from the cauldron of the lady, etc., but they also had severe restrictions. E. g. They some times (as seen with the Kumari) could not touch the ground, and were therefore carried around in thrones or standing on shields (as is best known to us from the French cartoon Asterix, actually). The goddesses could not bleed (again: as seen with the Kumari), they had to wear clothes in certain colors, etc. It was no easy task, being a deity… You can read more about these “taboos” in Sir James Frazer´s “The Golden Bough”, btw, if you are interested.

It is still unclear to me, whether only the gods would reincarnate, or if there was a general belief in reincarnation for everyone. Or perhaps if everyone reincarnated, but in order to reincarnate as a god, you would need to go through a special ritual. From what I can tell, the latter is the most likely. I hope I will understand this better, but for now, I will simply present to you what I do know.

It seems though, as if in Classical Antiquity, the mystery cults appeared because something had been lost by the adoption of civilization. Too many ordinary people, too little direct contact with the natural world and of course, a diminished human species.

It was no easy task being worthy of reincarnation. With civilization, more and more failed, until so many were “uninitiated”, and so many failed to see the purpose of it all, that they could be lured into universal cults where everyone, the more inferior the better, were accepted and approved of.

Yeah, I am talking about Christianity here…