Ancient Sparta: The First Self-Conscious Ethnostate? Part 1-3: Educating Citizen Soldiers

If in Athens we have ethnopolitical aspects, insofar as the democracy was tempered by Hellenic virtue, in Sparta we have a State wholly dedicated to systematic organization of the society according to a biopolitical ideal. Sparta’s mixed system of government and fiercely communitarian and hierarchical customs were supposed to have been created by the semi-legendary lawgiver Lycurgus, who perhaps lived in the ninth century B.C. Virtually nothing can be said for certain about his life. Lycurgus was, in later ages, rumored to have traveled to Egypt, Ionia, Crete, and even India, where “he talked with the Gymnosophists,”[1] before establishing Sparta’s constitution. What is clear, in any case, is that the basic law and way of life attributed to Lycurgus, and credited for Sparta’s success, were emphatically biopolitical.

Spartan law and culture were obsessed with systematically ensuring good breeding, martial education, and group unity. Spartan ethics and law considered that what was good was whatever was good for the community. During a debate as to whether a commander had abused his authority, the Spartan king Agesilaus argued: “The point to be examined . . . is simply this: has this action been good or bad for Sparta?”[2] Kevin MacDonald has argued that the law instituted by Lycurgus – featuring in-group altruism, relative egalitarianism, separation from and unity in the face of out-groups, specialization in warfare, and communally-determined in-group eugenics – qualifies as a genuine “altruistic group evolutionary strategy.”[3]

Few forms of government have so drawn the admiration of both liberals and ‘totalitarians’ as that of Sparta. Many republicans, both ancient and modern, have been impressed by the Spartans’ ‘mixed’ system of government, with its combination of monarchic, aristocratic, and democratic elements, as conducive to social unity, stability, and the rule of law. The Founding Fathers of the United States sought to emulate the stability of Sparta’s constitution and saw in it a precursor to their own system of checks and balances. Thinkers of a more communitarian bent, such as Rousseau and Hitler, have for their part admired the city for its rigorous organization in service of the community.

The Spartan citizen body was made up of landowning males past the age of 30 who had completed their arduous military training and education. These Spartiates, known as Homoioi (roughly meaning ‘Equals’ or ‘Peers’) made up an uncertain, but no doubt small, percentage of the country’s population. The Helots, Sparta’s large population of agricultural serfs, provided the citizens with the leisure to specialize in military training. These slaves were fellow Greek-speakers although, as non-Dorian Achaeans, there was a certain degree of ethnic difference from the Spartiates. So-called ‘Peripherals’ (perioikoi), foreign residents engaging in various skilled crafts at the service of the Spartans, appear to have regularly accumulated around the Spartan State.

Sparta was presided over by two relatively-weak kings, from two distinct royal families, who served as priests, generals, and occasionally judges. The Ephors, five powerful magistrates elected by all citizens for a non-renewable one-year term, were responsible for implementing decrees and had judicial powers to supervise and prosecute others, including the kings. The most powerful body was the Gerousia, a council made up of the two kings and 28 elders over the age of 60, who were elected for life. The Gerousia set the political agenda, debated issues, and presented the decisions open to the Assembly. The Assembly of Spartan citizens did not propose legislation but could only decide on whatever was presented by the Gerousia. Through these institutions, the Spartan regime sought to reconcile the values of authority, stability, law, aristocracy, seniority, and community. When asked why he did not institute a democracy, Lycurgus is supposed to have answered: “Make your own household a democracy first.”[4]

Spartan society was systematically organized by the regime to achieve social unity and martial prowess. Practically, among the elite Spartiate body of citizens, this meant the encouragement of births, the communal education of children according to an austere and militaristic way of life and living perpetually together through common meals and training. Failure to live up to the city’s demanding standards was harshly punished. Citizenship was not an automatic right, but had to be earned, by passing one’s educational training and paying one’s duties to the mess hall. According to Xenophon, Lycurgus “gave an equal share in the state to all law-abiding citizens, without regard for physical or financial deficiencies. But Lycurgus made it clear that if anyone should shirk the effort required to keep his laws, then he would no longer be considered one of the Equals.”[5]

Following such customs was in Sparta a sacred duty. Not only were Sparta’s institutions and customs attributed to the wise Lycurgus, but these were said to have been approved by Apollo himself. This was significant as the Spartans appear to have been exceptionally pious, regularly engaging in common rituals and sacrifices. Herodotus says that for the Spartans “divine matters took precedence over human ones” (Herodotus, 5.63). Once again, we find religious piety being central to the foundations of custom and the enforcement of group norms. Xenophon also highlights the importance of Spartan religious practice in warfare, saying of their meticulous rituals while on campaign: “if you witnessed this you would think that militarily others are amateurs, whereas Spartans alone are real masters of the craft of war.”[6] Both Xenophon and Plutarch believed that the joint and pious fulfillment of ritual inspires confidence in men before battle.[7]

Spartan politics began with the rearing of children and their education in the martial and communitarian values of their society. Lycurgus is said to have “regarded the upbringing of children as the greatest and noblest responsibility of the legislator.”[8] Young men and women performed sporting events in the nude, so as to encourage both physical fitness and marriages. Lycurgus was emphatic that there was a civic duty to ensure that the next generation of citizens be not only be produced but be the healthiest and best possible. Plutarch reports this while drawing a direct analogy with heredity in animals:

First and foremost Lycurgus considered children to belong not privately to their fathers, but jointly to the city, so that he wanted citizens produced not from random partners, but from the best. Moreover he observed a good deal of stupidity and humbug in others’ rules on these matters. Such people have their bitches and mares mounted by the finest dogs and stallions whose owners they can prevail upon for a favor or fee. But their wives they lock up and guard, claiming the right to produce their children exclusively, though they may be imbeciles, or past their prime, or diseased. They forget that where children are born of poor stock, the first to suffer from their poor condition are those who possess and rear them, while the same applies conversely to the good qualities of those from sound stock.[9]

Past a certain age, single men were severely stigmatized. Lycurgus also believed that “the production of children was the most important duty of free women,” thereby making a fundamental contribution to the society which sustained their freedom.[10] Spartan women were not sedentary and trapped in the family home, as most Greek women were. As their husbands were training constantly away from home, Spartan women were unusual in managing their own households, often becoming wealthy in their own right. These women were discouraged from overeating and encouraged to participate in sports such as wrestling and javelin-throwing on health grounds:

Thereby their children in embryo would make a strong start in strong bodies and would develop better, while the women themselves would also bear their pregnancies with vigor and would meet the challenge of a childbirth in a successful, relaxed way.[11]

It was apparently considered shameful for men to be seen with their wives at Sparta, resulting in sex occurring irregularly while the sex drive remained strong. There was another primitive eugenic rationale behind these measures: young, healthy, active, lustful parents were believed to produce healthier and stronger children. “Puny and deformed” newborns were to thrown into an abyss (or, perhaps more likely, killed through exposure) “considering it better both for itself and the state that the child should die if right from its birth it was poorly endowed for health or strength.”[12]

Lycurgus is supposed to have banned dowries and make-up: “So that none should be left unmarried because of poverty nor any pursued for their wealth, but that each man should study the girl’s character and make his choice on the basis of her good qualities.”[13] His concern with biological quality was so extreme he apparently even allowed for a bizarre official practice of ‘eugenic cuckoldry’ whereby an elderly husband could have children by introducing his wife to “any man whose physique and personality he admired.”[14] Conversely a wifeless man could, if “eager to have remarkable children,” have them “by any fertile and well-bred woman who came to his attention, subject to her husband’s consent.” Plutarch claims that by this measure the Spartans succeeded in “planting in fruitful soil, so to speak, and producing fine children who would be linked to fine ancestors by blood and family.”[15] These measures—so foreign to the contemporary mores of the West—were eugenic and natalist in their objectives. They also emphasize Spartans’ supreme subjection of their personal and familial interests to the public good, ideally up to and including access to their wives! Xenophon, an eyewitness source, claims that by these methods, Sparta gained “men whose size and strength are . . . superior.”[16]

There was an enormous emphasis in Sparta, as in no other Greek city, on the truly systematic education and training of the citizens in order to shape a culture conducive to the public good. Spartan education was communal and austere. The children were taken from their families at age seven and would not complete their training until they were 29. At that point, if the young man had succeeded in this agoge training, he would be made a full citizen. Whereas wealthy Athenians might have a private slave tutor for their children, Spartan children had a single Trainer-in-Chief (a paidomus, literally a “boy-herdsman”) and any citizen could discipline them.

Young Spartans would go barefoot, have a single cloak to wear all year in hot or cold, and would be given a limited amount of food, measures all aimed at making them tougher. Youths were expected to steal from or even murder Helots. The Spartans in general appear to have treated their Helots with extreme cruelty, from humiliation through making them drunk to regular ritualized murder—evidently aimed at keeping this class firmly separate and subservient. Plutarch himself concedes that “there is nothing to match either the freedom of the free man at Sparta or the slavery of the slave.”[17] Montesquieu later would sum up the conflicted feelings of many classical liberals concerning Sparta, saying: “Lycurgus, combining larceny with the spirit of justice, the harshest slavery with extreme liberty, the most atrocious sentiments with the greatest moderation, gave stability to his city.”[18]

We must imagine Sparta as an ordered, hierarchical, and pious state characterized by constant ritual and training, a cross between a military-athletic camp and a monastery. Plutarch says:

Spartiates’ training extended into adulthood, for no one was permitted to live as he pleased. Instead, just as in a camp, so in the city, they followed a prescribed lifestyle and devoted themselves to communal concerns. They viewed themselves absolutely as part of their country, rather than as individuals, and so unless assigned a particular job they would always be observing the boys and giving them useful piece of instruction, or learning themselves from their elders.[19]

Concerning adolescents, Lycurgus “gave orders that even in the streets they should keep both hands inside their cloaks, should proceed in silence, and should not let their gaze wander in any direction, but fix their eyes on the ground before them.”[20] Young adults were encouraged to be competitive in music, sports, and “manly gallantry.”[21] According to Xenophon, this education succeeded: “The result has been that respect and obedience in combination are found to a high degree at Sparta . . . [the system] turns out men who are more disciplined, more respectful, and (when required) more self-controlled.”[22] By his laws, Lycurgus was said to have “done away with prudery, sheltered upbringing, and effeminacy of any kind.”[23]

Go to Part 2.


[1]     Literally “naked wise men,” which is what the Greeks called the Hindu and perhaps Buddhist ascetics they found in India. Plutarch, Life of Lycurgus, 4.

[2]     Xenophon, Hellenica, 5.2.32

[3]     Kevin MacDonald, A People That Shall Dwell Alone: Judaism as a Group Evolutionary Strategy, with Diaspora Peoples (Lincoln, Nebraska: Writers Club, 2002), pp. 8-35, 394-95. Editor’s note: I first got the group strategy idea by writing a chapter on the Spartans for my 1988 book, Social and Personality Development: An Evolutionary Synthesis. 

[4]     Plutarch, Lycurgus, 19.

[5]     Xenophon, Spartan Constitution, 10.

[6]     Xenophon, Constitution, 13.

[7]      The later Greco-Roman writer Polybius went so far as to argue that Rome’s extreme religiosity was what made her constitution “so markedly superior” to other states (Polybius, 6.56). See Guillaume Durocher, “Religious Piety in Sparta & Rome,” Counter-Currents.com, January 18, 2018.

[8]     Plutarch, Lycurgus, 14.

[9]     Ibid., 15.

[10]   Xenophon, Constitution, 1.

[11]   Plutarch, Lycurgus, 14.

[12]   Ibid., 16.

[13]   Plutarch, Sayings of the Spartans, “Lycurgus,” 15.

[14]   Xenophon, Constitution, 1.

[15]   Plutarch, Lycurgus, 15.

[16]   Xenophon, Constitution, 1.

[17]   Plutarch, Lycurgus, 28.

[18]   Montesquieu, The Spirit of the Laws, 4.6.

[19]   Plutarch, Lycurgus, 24.

[20]   Xenophon, Constitution, 3.

[21]   Ibid., 4.

[22]   Ibid., 2.

[23]   Plutarch, Lycurgus, 14.

There is a sense in which all life for Spartan citizens was communal and hierarchical. Even once one had completed the agoge, Spartiates would eat together in common mess halls, again creating common feeling. The ages were mixed, so that the older could teach the young, and citizens were expected to discuss noble deeds. In the gymnasium, the oldest man would supervise, and citizens were expected to train regularly. Xenophon claims that “it would certainly not be easy for anyone to find men healthier or more physically apt than Spartiates.”[1]

Lycurgus reputedly had accompanied his basic law with a land reform giving each of those in the small citizen class an equal property, although economic inequality gradually accumulated over time. A positive consequence of the Spartans’ systematically communal lifestyle was an extremely high degree of trust among citizens. They shared each other’s hunting dogs and horses, the latter being extremely valuable property in those days. Citizens even trusted others to beat their own children if they had done wrong, for “there was a sense in which everyone regarded himself as father, tutor, and commander of each boy.”[2]

The entire society was oriented towards inculcating martial valor and unity. Cowards were severely stigmatized—so much so that they could be beaten freely—and “the citizens considered an honorable death preferable to a life of disgrace.”[3] Citizens were banned from working and instead “all their time was taken up by choral dances, festivals, feasts, hunting expeditions, physical exercise, and conversation.”[4] At the same time, the society’s general frugality meant “there was . . . no need to amass wealth (with all the work and concentration that this entails), since riches were emphatically neither envied nor esteemed.”[5] Music played a large role in Spartan society and their songs dealt with military heroism, sacrifice for Sparta, and the shaming of cowards. The result was an intensely communal ethos:

Altogether [Lycurgus] accustomed citizens to have no desire for a private life, nor knowledge of one, but rather to be like bees, always attached to the community, swarming together around their leader, and almost ecstatic with fervent ambition to devote themselves entirely to their country.[6]

The supreme values of this society are suggested even by their burial practices: “Those who buried a dead person were not permitted to inscribe the name on a grave except in the cases of a man who had died on campaign or a woman who had died in labor.”[7] The dead were buried within the city, so as to habituate the young to their sight.

Sparta was an exceptionally xenophobic society, sharply controlling population movements of both citizens and foreigners so to maintain their unique customs. Xenophon says that “expulsions of foreigners used to occur and absence abroad was not permitted, so that citizens should not be infected by lax habits caught from foreigners.”[8] Iron bars, worthless outside of Sparta, were the only legal currency in the State. Plutarch claims this also led to great benefits: “it was impossible to buy any shoddy foreign goods, and no cargo of merchandise would enter the harbors, no teacher of rhetoric trod Laconian soil, no begging seer, no pimp, no maker of gold or silver ornaments.”[9]

Plutarch says Sparta’s values of patriotism and sacrifice were apparently so ingrained that Spartan women were among their fiercest enforcers. A mother reputedly handed her son a shield as he was leaving for battle saying: “Son, either with this or on this.”[10] There are many stories of Spartan mothers rejoicing that their son died in battle or conversely, if he had returned by fleeing as a coward, killing him herself. Plutarch says:ntly so ingrained in the society that Spartan women were among their fiercest enforcers. As he left to fight and die at Thermopylae, Leonidas is supposed to have told his wife “to marry good men and bear good children.”[12] When Xerxes proposed making Leonidas tyrant of Greece, he is supposed to have responded: “For me, it is better to die for Greece than to be monarch of the people of my race.”[13]

The Spartans were famous for their brief ‘Laconic’ sayings and sharp wit. Plato claimed that the “distinctive kind of Spartan wisdom” was found in “their pithy, memorable sayings” (Protagoras, 343c), which can be recalled easily and thus be borne in mind in our daily lives. Laconic brevity also reflected the Spartan concern with doing well rather than merely speaking or speculating like the verbose Athenians. Lycurgus is supposed to have forbidden his laws from being written because “the guiding principles of most importance for the happiness and excellence of a state would remain securely fixed if they were embedded in citizens’ character and training.”[14] When asked why the Spartans kept their laws on bravery unwritten, a Spartan king is said to have replied: “it’s better for [the youth] to get used to acts of bravery rather than to study written documents.”[15]

A number of Spartan sayings have come down to us, although their precise attributions to various historical figures are probably unreliable. The Spartans, like the Cynic philosopher Diogenes, came to be idealized across the ancient world as an example of perfect virtue and would then tend to be credited with proverbs reflecting this. Nonetheless, the Sayings of the Spartans collected by Plutarch do give us a feeling for the Spartan spirit, as in the following sample:

When asked how anyone could rule the citizens safely without having a bodyguard, [King Agasicles] said: “By ruling them in the way that fathers do their sons.” (Agasicles, 2)

[King Agesilaus] watched a mouse being pulled from its hole by a small boy. When the mouse turned round, bit the hand of its captor and escaped, he pointed this out to those present and said: “When the tiniest creature defends itself like this against aggressors, what ought men to do, do you reckon?” (Agesilaus, 9).

When somebody asked what gain the laws of Lycurgus had brought to Sparta, he  said: “Contempt for pleasures.” (Agesilaus, 20)

To the man who was amazed at how modest his clothes and his meals were, and those of the other Spartans as well, he  said: “Freedom is what we reap from this way of life, my friend. (Agesilaus, 20).

When somebody else asked why Sparta lacked fortification walls, he pointed to the citizens under arms and said: “These are the Spartans’ walls.” (Agesilaus, 29)

As [King Agis] was passing through the Corinthians’ walls and observed their height and strength and great extent, he said: “What women live in this place?” (Agis son of Archidamus, 6)

When asked how one should remain a free man, he said: “By despising death.” (Agis son of Archidamus, 18)

When somebody said that [the philosopher Xenocrates] was a wise man and one of those who search for virtue, [King] Eudamidas said: “And when will he make use of it if he is still searching for it?” (Eudamidas son of Archidamus, 1)

To the stranger who was claiming that among his own citizens he was called a friend of Sparta [King Theopompus] said: “It would be better for you to be called a friend of your fellow citizens rather than a friend of Sparta.” (Theopompus, 2)

When a Persian inquired what type of constitution met with his greatest approval, he said: “Whichever gives brave men and cowards their due.” (Lysander, 11)

When someone was asking why they made the poet Tyrtaeus [an Athenian, whose poems provide some of the only surviving Spartan literature] a citizen, [Panthoidas] said: “So that a foreigner should never be seen as our leader.” (Panthoidas, 3)

When amongst the spoils some people were amazed at the extravagance of the Persians’ clothing, he said: “Better for them to be men of great worth rather than to have possessions of great worth.” (Panthoidas, 5)

When [Governor Pedaritus] observed some effeminate person being nonetheless praised by the citizens for his fairness, he said: “Men who are like women should not be praised nor should women who are like men, unless some necessity forces the woman.” (Pedaritus, 2)

When someone asked [King Charillus] which type of government he considered the best, he said: “The one in which the largest number of citizens are willing to compete with each other in excellence and without civil concord.” (Charillus, 4)

Go to Part 3.


[1]  Xenophon, Constitution, 5.

[2]  Plutarch, Lycurgus, 17.

[3]  Xenophon, Constitution, 9.

[4]  Plutarch, Lycurgus, 24.

[5]        Ibid.

[6]  Ibid., 25.

[7]  Ibid., 27.

[8]        Xenophon, Constitution, 14.

[9]  Plutarch, Lycurgus, 9.

[10] Plutarch, Sayings of Spartan Women, 16.

[11] Plutarch, Lycurgus, 14.

[12] Plutarch, Sayings of the Spartans, “Leonidas,” 2.

[13]      Ibid., 10. Interestingly, many of Plutarch’s Sayings of the Spartans – which may have in fact been attributed in later years – contain expressions of pan-Hellenic patriotism, sentiments generally at odds with the more narrowly self-interested realities of Spartan foreign policy.

[14] Plutarch, Lycurgus, 13.

[15] Plutarch, Sayings of the Spartans, “Zeuxidamus,” 1.

 

The Virtuous Circle of Spartan Power: Discipline Through Lordship

The defining fact of Spartan life was the hard-won conquest of neighboring Messenia in the eighth century and the enslavement of its population as Helots. This victory had launched the virtuous circle of Spartan power. The subjugated Helots provided the Spartan citizen-soldiers with both the leisure and the imperative need to dedicate themselves to martial prowess in the face of a constant threat of rebellion at home. The entire social organization of Sparta came to reflect this state of affairs. Thucydides noted: “most Spartan institutions have always been designed with a view to security against the Helots.”[1]

The system instituted by Lycurgus proved remarkably successful for centuries. The organization and training of the—at their height—around 8,000 Spartan citizen-soldiers to suppress the Helots also translated into international military power, which in turn allowed Sparta to secure allies and thus yet more military power in the Peloponnese. Xenophon opens his account of the Spartan regime saying: “Sparta, despite having one of the lowest populations, had nonetheless clearly become the most powerful and most famous state in Greece.”[2] The unsentimental Thucydides says of Sparta: ‟its system of good order is very ancient and it has never been subject to tyrants. The Spartan constitution has remained unchanged for somewhat over 400 years . . . a source of strength, enabling their political intervention in other states” (Thu., 1.18). Indeed, Sparta was hailed for her lack of civil wars among citizens, a common cause of grief in the Greek world, and for having intervened to liberate other Greek cities from tyrants. Sparta’s oligarchic government seems to have been better than Athens at securing consenting allies among fellow-Greek city-states. The Spartans seem to have been better able at developing stable interpersonal ties with foreign elites,[3]  whereas the Athenian democracy tended to a chauvinism serving her own citizens alone without regard for its imperial subjects. Thucydides has Pericles boast that Athens did not use undependable foreign allies in war but only Athenian residents, implying that Sparta in contrast had the assistance more-or-less consenting allies.[4]

The great successes of Spartan social organization came at a heavy price. The city was devoid of material culture, leaving precious few artifacts in the archaeological record. Even during its heyday, Thucydides observed that Spartan architecture was so unimpressive in comparison with Athens, that “if the city of Sparta were to become deserted, with only the temples and the foundations of buildings left to view, I imagine that with the passage of time future generations would find it very hard to credit its reputed power (Thu., 1.10). Alexander Hamilton wrote that “Sparta was little better than a well-regulated camp.”[5] Sparta is unlikely to have had much intellectual culture either. If there were any Spartan dramatists and philosophers, there is virtually nothing that survives of them. There is little to suggest there was any Spartan equivalent of Athens’ extraordinary theatrical and philosophical achievement, notwithstanding the idealizations and ironic paradoxes of the philosophers.[6] Indeed, the Spartans were said to be “the least intellectual of men” (Aristotle, Rhetoric, 1398b).[7]

Sparta was basically a caste society. Besides the solidary elite citizen body of Spartiates, there were also “fallen” Spartans who had lost their citizenship for reasons of poverty or dishonor, “neo-citizens” who had been naturalized (especially in the later years) to have more soldiers, the working Peripherals who gravitating around the city, and finally the Helots. This appears to have been, somewhat like ancient and medieval India, a largely static society. It was certainly a closed society in which, besides the rigid social order, foreigners were restricted from entry and regularly evicted to prevent the Spartans from being infected with foreign cultural influence. Furthermore, it appears that Sparta’s power in the Peloponnese was based on its ability to retard urban development abroad: rival cities were broken up into villages and placed under the government of Spartan-friendly landowners.[8] Sparta has an air of stagnation, and while the appearance of eternity typically impressed the Ancients, we Moderns tend to feel that that which does not grow is already doomed. At the same time, living in a time of perpetual economic growth leading to cultural collapse and ecological exhaustion, the Spartan ideal and long-lasting success of a socio-political steady-state perhaps has a new relevance for our time.

By the yardstick of individual freedom, the ledger is perhaps not quite as much in Athens’ favor as one might expect. In every premodern economy, the precious leisure necessary for culture and civic life is necessarily the purview of a select few. Athens no doubt afforded more scope for individual merit, freedom, and political participation to a greater share of the population on the whole. But one also should not forget that democratic Athens itself was based on chattel slavery, subject colonies, and house-bound women. In the Spartan empire, notwithstanding the hard lives of the Helots, women and allied states were generally freer than those of Athens. Furthermore, those who have tasted the monastic life may also suspect that the highly-regimented Spartan lifestyle—the constant training in community life, athletics, and self-restraint—may have offered citizens certain deep satisfactions not available with the liberal lifestyle.

Ironically, Sparta’s greatest failing was precisely in the biological and specifically in the demographic sphere. Sparta, somewhat miraculously, defeated Athens in the Peloponnesian War but fell within decades due to the failure to maintain the population of citizen-soldiers. As Kevin MacDonald observes:

It would appear that the system devised by the Israelite lawgiver [Moses] was in some sense a better strategy for maintaining long-term ethnic coherence than that designed by the Spartan lawgiver, since the Israelite strategy, arguably, continues today (see [The Culture of Critique], ch. 8). The Spartan system was an excellent defensive system, but was ill equipped to administer an empire, and there were no provisions, such as the hereditary Israelite priestly class, that would have allowed it to survive being militarily conquered – a contingency that was all but inevitable in the ancient world and that certainly continues to some extent today.[9]

For MacDonald, “while the group strategy of the ancient Spartans was successful for a significant period, it was ultimately a failure.”[10] In marked contrast with the Jews, who were able to survive through fanatical adherence to a dogmatic ethnocentric religion, the Spartans proved completely incapable of maintaining their identity and group evolutionary strategy in the absence of a supportive sovereign State. In this, the Spartans were sadly typical of Western peoples. There is furthermore little reason to believe that Sparta’s primitive eugenic measures had much positive effect.

We would be wrong to downplay the Spartan achievement however. The other Greeks were greatly impressed by those four centuries of Spartan order and power which were so great a factor in their international affairs. Polybius, a later Hellenistic historian who documented the rise of Rome, gave a balanced summary of the greatness and limits of Sparta through a useful comparison with the Roman Republic. He remarked that “the constitution so framed by Lycurgus preserved independence in Sparta longer than anywhere else in recorded history” (Polybius, 6.10). Furthermore:

The Lycurgan system is designed for the secure maintenance of the status quo and the preservation of autonomy. Those who believe that this is what a state is for must agree that there is not and never has been a better system or constitution than that of the Spartans. But if one has greater ambitions that that – if one thinks that it is a finer and nobler thing to be a world-class leader, with an extensive dominion and empire, the center and focal point of everyone’s world – then one must admit that the Spartan constitution is deficient and the Roman constitution is superior and more dynamic. (Polybius, 6.50)

There is no doubt that there is a tendency to “slouching” in human history: every new generation balks at the unexplained disciplines and traditional rigors inherited from the past. If this rebelling against the past is done for the sake of comfort and pleasure, as opposed to replacing a tradition with new practices because they are more conducive to the public good, we call this decadence. In Sparta alone, the citizens were able to maintain a fearsome degree of virtue, by the authority held by the elders, by the systematic education and training of the citizens, and by the threat posed by the Helots.

The constitution of Lycurgus – with its stability, mixing of elitism and democracy, sovereignty, lawfulness, training, social unity, and sacrifice for the common good – may serve a model for all nations that truly wish to fight to determine their own destiny and adhere to values. The example of Sparta, like Prussia in the modern era, also shows that smallness is no reason for defeatism, that all nations have, with effort, a chance at achieving freedom and greatness. No wonder that the law of Lycurgus and the sacrifice of Leonidas’ 300 Spartans have inspired philosophers and statesmen throughout the ages, even in the face of terrible odds. Given the challenges facing Western and European nations in the twenty-first century – consider the sheer scale of the rising foreign superpowers, ecological threats, and demographic collapse – the Spartan experience in building a lawful, holistic, and biopolitical martial republic may yet help inspire our renewal.


Bibliography

Aristotle (trans. H. C. Lawson-Tancred), The Art of Rhetoric (London: Penguin, 1991).

Cartledge, Paul, Sparta and Lakonia: A Regional History, 1300 to 362 BC (New York: Routledge, 2002).

Herodotus (trans. Robin Waterfield), The Histories (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998).

MacDonald, Kevin, A People That Shall Dwell Alone: Judaism as a Group Evolutionary Strategy, with Diaspora Peoples (Lincoln, Nebraska: Writers Club, 2002).

Plato (ed. John M. Cooper), Complete Works, (Indianapolis, Indian: Hackett, 1997).

Plutarch (trans. Richard Talbert and Ian Scott-Kilvert), On Sparta (London: Penguin, 2005), includes Plutarch’s Life of Lycurgus, Sayings of Spartans, and Sayings of Spartan Women, and Xenophon’s Spartan Constitution.

Polybius (trans. Robin Waterfield), The Histories (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010).

Xenophon (trans. Rex Warner), A History of My Times [Hellenica] (London: Penguin, 1979).

Thucydides (trans. Martin Hammond), The Peloponnesian War (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009).


[1]  Thucydides, History of the Peloponnesian War, 4.80. Translation from Paul Cartledge, Sparta and Lakonia: A Regional History, 1300 to 362 BC (New York: Routledge, 2002), Annex 4, p. 299. The passage is somewhat ambiguous. Cartledge also provides an alternative translation: “as far as the Helots are concerned, most Spartan institutions have always been designed with a view to security.”

[2]  Xenophon, Spartan Constitution, 1.

[3]        The Old Oligarch observes:

 For oligarchic cities it is necessary to keep to alliances and oaths. If they do not abide by agreements or if injustice is done, there are the names of the few who made the agreement. But whatever agreements the populace makes can be repudiated by referring the blame to the one who spoke or took the vote, while the others declare that they were absent or did not approve of the agreement made in the full assembly. (The Constitution of the Athenians, 2.18)

[4]        Pericles says: “The Spartans do not invade our land on their own, but they have all their allies with them” (Thu., 2.39). Earlier, Pericles had argued that the Spartans’ need for their allies’ agreement to take decisions would paralyze them:

 In a single pitched battle the Peloponnesians and their allies are capable of resisting the whole of Greece, but they are incapable of maintaining a war against an opposition which differs from them in kind: as long, that is, that they continue without a central deliberative forum, for lack of which they cannot take any immediate decisive action, and as long as all the various tribal groups in a miscellaneous confederacy have equal votes, so each promotes its own concern – a system unlikely to produce any effective results. (Thucydides, 1.141)

This can be taken as an early argument for sovereign central government rather than divided confederal government. Perhaps the need to convince their allies was partly responsible for the supposed timidity and slowness of Spartan foreign policy (Thu., 8.96).

[5]        Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 6.

[6]        Plutarch states that “some . . . claim that devotion to the intellect is more characteristic of Spartans than love of physical exercise” (Lycurgus, 20) and, in a beautiful rhetorical flourish, concludes his Life saying:

 Lycurgus . . . brought into the light of day, not paper theories, but a functioning constitution which is quite unmatched. To those who suspect that it is impracticable for a theoretical structure to be centered upon a Sage, he has exhibited his whole city practicing philosophy” (Lycurgus, 31).

Such passages in Plutarch must be considered idealizations and inspiring exhortations to political philosophy, rather than realistic history.

In his Protagoras, Plato has Socrates ironically claim that “the Spartans have the best education in philosophy and debate” (342e). This is no place for a full commentary on this dialogue. However, given the context, it seems Plato is making a paradoxical and humorous comment praising certain Spartan virtues – namely discretion, Laconic wit, remembrance of wise sayings – as integral to the practice of philosophy. One of the great challenges in studying ancient Greek literature, is determining whether a text is ironic or is making some kind of in-joke. Herodotus, Socrates, Plato, and Xenophon certainly often appealed to ironic humor.

[7]  Whereas Aristotle is here quoting someone else, he was more generally one of the few ancient philosophers to be broadly critical of Sparta, having come of age after its collapse after the Battle of Leuctra. At the same time, Aristotle did admire the communitarian ambitions of the Spartan educational system.

[8]  Xenophon, Hellenica, 5.2.7.

[9]  MacDonald, PSDA, p. 395.

[10] MacDonald, PSDA, p. 8.

 

What Was The Sphinx And What Is Wrong With Its Body And Head?

AncientPages.com – There has never been a satisfactory answer to what the Sphinx actually is or was. Anyone who goes to Giza can see for himself or herself that there is something ‘wrong’ with the Sphinx. It only takes an instant. The body is gigantic and the head is just a pimple.

The Egyptians never did anything like that, they were always meticulous about proportions in their art.

So how is it that we have this monster with a tiny head sitting there in the sand, then?
There are several other things wrong with the Sphinx. They are:

  • The back is flat. Who ever saw a lion with a flat back, no big chest, and no mane?
  • The Sphinx is sitting in a deep hole in the ground. Why is that? Why is it not sitting somewhere high up so that it can show off?
  • There is a ruined temple right in front of the Sphinx, with a wall practically up against its nose, and no door in that wall. Why obstruct the view of the Sphinx from the front like that? And if the temple was for worshipping the Sphinx, why is there no access from the temple to the Sphinx, so that you can’t even get to it?
  • The pit in which the Sphinx sits seems to be deeply eroded, as if by flows of water. What caused all that? It looks as if water has poured down the sides. On the other hand, there are no such vertical erosion patterns on the Sphinx itself, which instead has clear horizontal erosion patterns. How can these two different patterns at right angles to each other be reconciled? And what could possibly have caused either of them?

None of this makes any sense if you think about it. Of course, many people don’t think. They just gawp and move on, their brains in neutral.

But when my wife Olivia and I first saw the Sphinx many years ago, we just stood there in astonishment and both agreed that the whole thing was wrong, wrong, wrong.
So now after many years of work, we think we have found some answers.

Naturally, any new idea about anything that ‘everybody knows’ makes conventionally thinking people enraged, and (2) makes anti-establishment people delighted. No prizes for guessing which side I’m on.

Let me first declare my position on what has become something of an entrenched notion amongst my fellow anti-Establishmentarians.

I do not believe that the Sphinx is 12,500 years old. Nor do I believe in ‘ancient rain’.

I do believe that the Sphinx is older than conventionally believed. But I do not believe it is thousands of years older, or anything of that kind.

I do believe there is water erosion at the Sphinx site, but I do not believe it had anything to do with ‘ancient rain’, nor do I believe there was anything there to be eroded at the time any ‘ancient rain’ fell.

So what is the answer, then?

Sphinx Island & Moat

The water of the Nile in those days, at the time of inundation once a year (which no longer happens because of the Aswan dam), came right up to the edge of the Sphinx Temple, where there are even quays in front. So what I believe happened was that the water of the Nile was let into the Sphinx Pit, which I now call the Sphinx Moat, by some simple water-raising devices, led along the narrow channel between the Sphinx Temple and the Valley Temple (the two structures in front of the Sphinx), and its flow was controlled by a series of sluices and water gates.


The signs of these sluices and gates, with their many bolt holes and so forth, no longer exist, because new stones and cement have been laid over them. But not to worry! I took plenty of photographs of them before they disappeared, and those are all reproduced in our book. Everyone can then see it all very clearly.

The reason why the temple wall is in front of the Sphinx is to act as the fourth barrier to the water. The reason why there is no door in the wall is that it would have let the water out.

The horizontal erosion on the side of the Sphinx (where it is not covered by ‘restoration stones’) is because the Sphinx was sitting in the middle of a moat filled with water. The vertical erosion on the sides of the pit, especially the south side, is because of the continual dredging of the Moat due to the windblown sand accumulating there. Every time the Moat was dredged, water poured down in torrents onto the sides, leading to vertical erosion, accentuated by the natural cavities in the limestone bedrock.

So I think the Sphinx was, amongst other things, an island!

This immediately solves the puzzle of the evidence recorded by the fifth century BCE Greek historian Herodotus, who said that King Cheops let water in from the Nile to surround an island at Giza. Here it is!

Whose Head is on the Sphinx?

So we have got an island. Now what do we do with it? And why is King Cheops’s head the size of a pimple on the front of this large flat-backed lion, surrounded by water? What’s going on?

But wait! Who says that is King Cheops’s head? Some say it is King Chephren’s head, but if you have ever seen Chephren’s head on that huge statue in the Cairo Museum, you know they look nothing alike at all, since Chephren has a long face and the Sphinx has a round face, just for starters, and there’s plenty else that’s not the same too.

At this point of my wonderings, I began to feel really uncomfortable. I generally know when something doesn’t fit. I may not know what does fit, but I more often know what does not.

And that face is neither Cheops (not that we know what he really looked like anyway, as the only likeness of him that survives is a three inch-high ivory statuette, which could be your Uncle Tony or even your Auntie Madge for that matter) nor old Chephren Long-Face. So who is it?

It was at this point that I discovered one of those forgotten sources which keep falling into my lap, and in this case it was an article written by a German archaeologist named Ludwig Borchardt long before the Sphinx was excavated, when only its head and neck were sticking above the sand.

Borchardt used to go and stand there and look at it. In those days, you could look the Sphinx in the eye and he wouldn’t even flinch, in fact he smiled back. Nowadays, he’s very stuck up, with his head high above us if we stand at his feet, so you can’t make out the details of his head all that well.

Borchardt got to thinking. He noticed that the Sphinx was wearing eye-paint stripes (no comment, pharaohs have the right to do what they like as consenting adults in the privacy of their own Sphinx Pits), and he knew that those were not worn in the period known as the Old Kingdom, when Cheops and Chephren lived. He noticed the details of the stripe patterns in the strange headdress worn by the Sphinx. The face had to be that of a pharaoh, since this headdress was the sacred religious headdress of the pharaoh known as a nemes. But Borchardt, who was head of the German Institute at Cairo and therefore knew a thing or two, realised that those stripe patterns were also not used in the Old Kingdom.

He started to do some research on nemes headdresses, and he discovered that those particular stripe patterns were only used in the Middle Kingdom period, hundreds of years later than Cheops and Chephren. He wrote this all up in technical form and published it in a distinguished scholarly periodical (in German of course, but I have translated it and it appears as an appendix to our book), and concluded that the Sphinx had been carved in the Middle Kingdom Period, not in the Old Kingdom period.

But everybody laughed at poor old Borchardt. Who ever heard of such a thing? The Middle Kingdom! Borchardt must have gone crazy! And then the Sphinx was excavated in 1926, and finally completely excavated in 1936, and it was perfectly clear to everyone that the Sphinx was much older than the Middle Kingdom. But everybody forgot that Borchardt had never seen the Sphinx’s body at the time he wrote the article, he was only talking about the head.

So I have reopened the case and concluded that the head was recarved in the Middle Kingdom, just as Borchardt said, and what is more, I believe I can even identify precisely which pharaoh’s face that is. Of course, to find that out, you really need to see the book.

However, it is all very well identifying the face on the Sphinx. Some people might be satisfied just doing that. But no, it’s like watching a film noir without knowing the ending. Even if you know whodunnit, you still want to know the motive.

“Everybody knows” Herd Mentality

So what was the Sphinx before it had that guy’s face carved on it? Well, to figure that one out you have to try to figure out what the Sphinx was before that pharaoh got his chisels on it. This draws one’s attention to the flat back. “Everybody knows” that the Sphinx has the body of a lion. As soon as I hear that “everybody knows” something, I know that it must be wrong. I have a pathologically anti-herd mentality. All you have to do is tell me “everybody knows” something, and I will instantly disbelieve it. That is because crowds are always wrong. Crowds have about as much sense as a mollusc.

I started from the premise that the Sphinx was not a lion at all. Millions of people see it every year, from all over the world, and they all “know” that it is a lion. So that means that it cannot possibly be one. They “know” it is a lion because they have been told that it is a lion. The Germans were told that Hitler was their saviour and so they “knew” it, the Russians all “knew” that Stalin was like a gentle father, who would look after them. Yes, everybody, or at least everybody they knew, “knew” these things. And people also all once “knew” that the Earth was flat, and that the Sun went round the Earth. Those things were all “known.” But were they true?

If it wasn’t a lion, what was it? Well, it had to be an animal with a straight back, with no huge chest, and no mane. It also had to be an animal that crouched like that with its legs stuck out in front of it. (There is no use looking too closely at the paws, as they are completely covered in restoration stones, and have been shaped to look like “what everybody knows,” in order to re-confirm the consensus falsehood which everybody has agreed to believe in.)

Anubis – Guardian of the Necropolis

The Sphinx is crouching there at the entrance to the Necropolis like a guardian. Well, there it is! It is a guard dog! The ancient Egyptians had a god called Anubis, who was a crouching wild dog, generally referred to as a jackal (although strictly speaking there were no jackals in Egypt, and Anubis was really a wild dog species which is now extinct).

Anubis was the guardian of the Necropolis, the guardian of the dead, and he was often depicted in the precise position of the Sphinx – and famously in a statue found in the Tomb of Tutankhamun as well – so that his image is familiar to almost anyone who has ever had an interest in ancient Egypt.

In Figure 1 I show the drawing I commissioned which shows how the recarved head of the Sphinx was carved out of the neck stump which remained on the Sphinx after the original statue was mutilated by the rampaging mobs who smashed up everything they could on the Giza Plateau during the period of chaos known as the First Intermediate Period, between 2200 and 2000 BCE.

It was the easiest thing in the world to knock the ears and nose off the Sphinx when the Sphinx was Anubis. You couldn’t put them back because the Sphinx was carved out of the solid bedrock, and the pieces must have been smashed to bits anyway. So the later exhibitionist pharaoh could even tell himself he was doing a pious act and ‘restoring’ the statue by flaunting himself, just as, say, Madonna helps the world, doesn’t she? Tom Cruise is also saving the world, remember? Yes, we all know that all celebrities are getting their pictures in the papers only for noble causes, and it has nothing to do with wanting people to look at them, or with such a low thing as vanity.

Speaking of movie stars, the Sphinx is now so botoxed and has had so much plastic surgery from crazy ‘restoration’ (which is all shown in great detail in our book) that he could easily get a lead part in a blockbuster. But his ‘nose job’ didn’t go so well, as it is still missing. It was hacked off in the 13th century by a fanatical imam named Sheikh Mohammed, who wished to purge Egypt of non-Islamic influences. He got as far as the nose, at least. (The story that the nose was shot off by Napoleon’s soldiers is false.)

So now we have a crouching Anubis as an island, surrounded by a little lake. And at last we have something which students of the ancient texts can suddenly recognise. For the most ancient surviving Egyptian texts, known as the Pyramid Texts, often speak of a sacred place associated with the Giza Necropolis called Jackal Lake. And here it is!

Now we are getting somewhere. It is all beginning to make sense. In our book we gather together the many ancient texts which refer to Anubis guarding the Necropolis, situated at Giza, being beside a causeway, and being very large. We also reproduce Fourth Dynasty Giza tomb reliefs showing a giant Anubis, which may be intended as actual depictions of the Sphinx.

Secret Chamber Beneath the Sphinx

Most people who are intrigued by Egyptian mysteries have been wondering for a long time whether there might be any secret chamber beneath the Sphinx. I have crawled around inside the Sphinx, and I describe the tunnel which exists in the rear portion of the Sphinx’s body, as well as the vertical tunnel carved out of the bedrock beneath the Sphinx’s rump, and reproduce photos of these. In Figure 2 you see a photo which Olivia took of me with my head sticking out of the Sphinx’s ass, which perhaps proves how well I know him.

Then an amazing thing happened. I came across a passage in one of the old books which I collect, in this case one published in 1715, which described a chamber beneath the Sphinx and gave an eyewitness account of it! I was astounded. The book referred to earlier accounts of this chamber, but neglected to say who had written them or when they had been published. Slight problem! How was I to find these books?

If you went into the British Library and told a librarian you needed a book published before 1715 which described a chamber beneath the Sphinx, you would be told to come back when you had the author’s name or the title of the book. All I had to go on was ‘a book mentioning the Sphinx before 1715’, so how did I do it?

That is where my special abilities come in, which enable me to obtain information which others seem not able to obtain. I am what you might call an information retrieval expert, and I do not need to know anything about the field in order to obtain its ‘concealed’ information. There is no such thing as concealed or destroyed information: it is all there in Information Space if you have access.

Everyone knows about the emails which people think they have deleted from our computers, but which can be recovered by computer data recovery experts (as part of a criminal investigation, for instance). Well, there is a higher version of that, which enables all information which has ever existed in any material form to be accessed from the wholly non-material realm of Information Space.

A book that verifies the existence of secret underground chambers beneath the Sphinx and demonstrates its origins as the Egyptian god of the dead, Anubis

• Includes an anthology of eyewitness accounts from early travelers who explored the secret chambers before they were sealed in 1926

• Reveals that the Sphinx was originally carved as a monumental crouching Anubis, the Egyptian jackal god of the necropolis

Shrouded in mystery for centuries, the Sphinx of Giza has frustrated many who have attempted to discover its original purpose. Accounts exist of the Sphinx as an oracle, as a king’s burial chamber, and as a temple for initiation into the Hermetic Mysteries. Egyptologists have argued for decades about whether there are secret chambers underneath the Sphinx, why the head-to-body ratio is out of proportion, and whose face adorns it.

In The Sphinx Mystery, Robert Temple addresses the many mysteries of the Sphinx. He presents eyewitness accounts, published over a period of 281 years, of people who saw the secret chambers and even went inside them before they were sealed in 1926–accounts that had been forgotten until the author rediscovered them. He also describes his own exploration of a tunnel at the rear of the Sphinx, perhaps used for obtaining sacred divinatory dreams.

Robert Temple reveals that the Sphinx was originally a monumental Anubis, the Egyptian jackal god, and that its face is that of a Middle Kingdom Pharaoh, Amenemhet II, which was a later re-carving. In addition, he provides photographic evidence of ancient sluice gate traces to demonstrate that, during the Old Kingdom, the Sphinx as Anubis sat surrounded by a moat filled with water–called Jackal Lake in the ancient Pyramid Texts–where religious ceremonies were held. He also provides evidence that the exact size and position of the Sphinx were geometrically determined in relation to the pyramids of Cheops and Chephren and that it was part of a pharaonic resurrection cult. Read more

Unfortunately, I have never met anyone who seems to be able to access this material methodically and systematically. Most human beings can access it in a feeble and flickering fashion, by means of what is called ‘intuition’ or ‘hunches’. Perhaps it is just as well that proper access to all this information is limited. After all, the purpose of our being here in the material world is to see how we cope without information. That is why people like myself find it so difficult to communicate what we know when we somehow, in a way we do not understand, acquire information from Information Space. It is mostly not intended for circulation, and maybe I should not even be doing it. When I reveal such information to people, they never believe me anyway, so I generally do not bother.

I cannot explain how I access it. I seem to ‘see through matter’ in some way which is difficult to describe, and I see the Information behind it on the other side. Matter becomes increasingly transparent to me every day anyway, and I no longer believe in it. On only one occasion was I so desperate that I ‘raped’ Information Space. That was when our beloved dog Kim was mistakenly locked in a room with a digital security code. Because she was old and ill and needed water, and might otherwise die before I could get someone with the code to come, I ‘accessed’ the numerical code, punched it in, the door opened, and I released her. I didn’t do it instantly. I first made two or three hysterical wrong attempts and wasted precious minutes through being over-stressed. I made myself try to remain calm and then got it right. This meant that I actually had to access the whole number of several digits, none of which was known to me. Really, we are not supposed to do this sort of thing, but my dog was more important to me than protocol.

Also important to me is a Larger Dog, the Sphinx! I feel almost as affectionate towards him as I did… well, no, that would not be fair to Kim. But I also like the Dog Star. In fact, I am a sucker for dogs, I really am. I am not a cat person, even though I am a great fan of the original version of the film ‘Cat People’ (1942). Watch it sometime! See my review of it on my website.

I was eventually able to find 281 years’ worth of published eyewitness accounts of the chamber beneath the Sphinx, including detailed information about exactly where it was, its size, and the fact that it contained the remains of a wooden coffin. Because the chamber was described as having hieroglyphics on the walls, I am certain that it was what archaeologists call ‘an intruded burial’, but it must have been a royal one, as a shaft was carefully constructed and a chamber cut in one of the most important monuments in Egypt, within the sacred precincts of the royal Necropolis. The shaft was sealed with cement by Émile Baraize in 1926.

A century earlier, Henry Salt also sealed some openings and passages elsewhere at the Sphinx, and was sharply criticised for it by the French Count de Forbin. All of this is described in full detail in our book. So, yes, there is a ‘secret chamber’ beneath the Sphinx. And the information in our book proves this beyond all possibility of doubt. But no, it is not original and does not date from the time of the Sphinx’s carving. Also, it is empty, so there is no gold or treasure. But if we could just read what it says on the walls!
Another thing I was able to demonstrate is that the Sphinx and the three Giza pyramids were part of a single unified design concept of the Giza Plateau. The position and size of the Sphinx is determined precisely in relation to the three pyramids, in a manner never before noticed. This is shown and explained at great length in the book, and it is not really possible to summarise that material, as it is too lengthy and detailed for a brief description. I can say, however, that it was part of a resurrection cult.

In the process of explaining this in detail, I even have occasion to explain the true nature of those bizarre reliefs in a crypt at Denderah which have excited a great deal of speculation, the ones with the ‘lightbulbs’, although they are 2,500 years more recent, and their only connection is through the symbolism.

I hope everybody will get a lot out of looking through our book, and, who knows, maybe even reading it. Stranger things have happened.

Written by: Robert Temple – New Dawn

This article has been republished with permission of New Dawn Magazine

Copyright © New Dawn If you appreciated this article, please consider a digital subscription to New Dawn.

There is a whole chapter of White history we are missing.

 

Did Aryan Giants Build the European Megaliths?

The medieval Danish historian Saxo Grammaticus insisted that giants must have once existed, because only they, with their awesome strength and superhuman capabilities, could have built the dolmens, menhirs, massive walls, and other structures that are strewn across Western Europe. The idea of a vast megalithic culture that once dominated much of Europe in the remote past is taken up by the author Paul Dunbavin in his book Atlantis of the West. For Dunbavin, the megalithic structures of Europe are not just simple creations built by a Stone Age culture, but the sophisticated handiwork of an advanced and ancient race, possibly the Atlanteans. (Indeed, Britain was once named Albion, after a Titan king of Atlantis.) Dunbavin believes that Atlantis lies beneath the Irish Sea and was submerged in 3100 BCE when a comet struck Earth, causing the Earth’s crust to shift and thus shrinking some of the existing landmasses, including those in and around ancient Europe (Dunbavin 2003).

Located on a rocky promontory near Sissian in Armenia is the profoundly ancient site of Zorats Karer, also known as Karahunj, which has been dubbed the Armenian Stonehenge. It dates to approximately 7600–4500 BCE, and as such, is probably the oldest stone circle in Europe. The rocks of this circle are quite large and extremely heavy. Extensive research carried out by Paris Herouni and Elma Parsamyan of the Biurakan Observatory has led them to conclude that the site was dedicated to the Armenian sun god Ari in that some of the stones mirror the brightest star of the Cygnus constellation—Deneb.
Tellingly, some old Armenian folktales tell of a distant epoch when the sun god Ari ordered a fallen race of giants to move the immense blocks of stone to the site and construct it. (Note the similarity between the name of the sun god Ari and “Aryan” and also the correlation with the Aryan sun god myths).

The question of whether Zorats Karer could be the oldest observatory of its kind in Europe, if not the world, was taken up by Oxford astrophysicist Mihran Vardanyan. He agrees that this site was no doubt an ancient observatory, but also suggests that it may well have been an ancient necropolis:
The most commonly accepted theory about the meaning of Karahunj is that it is an ancient burial ground, or necropolis—a place to act as a bridge between the earth and the heavens in the cyclical journey of the soul involving life, death and rebirth. The necropolis thesis is certainly true for after our initial investigations of the central circle, it is clear the site was aligned to the sun, most likely aligned to the moon and—what is really exciting, possibly even some stars or planets—owing to the placement of small holes drilled through the monoliths and aimed at the horizon. It is these holes which makes this exceptional megalithic site unique out of all similar European sites. (Vardanyan 2011)

In December 2010, the popular History channel documentary series Ancient Aliens featured Zorats Karer on episode 14, “Unexplained Structures.” The show linked Herouni and Parsamyan’s Deneb theory with the discovery of three hundred exoplanets by NASA’s Kepler planet-finding satellite within the Cygnus constellation (History 2010). This connection, without a doubt, is truly sensational and demands further investigation.

One of the most ancient and archaeologically significant megalithic sites in the world is Baalbek, where the bones of what may be ancient giants have been found. Baalbek lies approximately eighty-six kilometers northeast of the city of Beirut in eastern Lebanon. This most enigmatic of holy places is one of the Near East’s most important Roman and pre-Roman temple sites of study by historians and archaeologists. In 1898, a German expedition there claimed to have discovered no evidence of occupation prior to the Roman period, despite other claims suggesting a very ancient habitation of the site.

Recent archaeological finds have supported the latter idea, for in a deep trench at the edge of the Jupiter temple platform, Neolithic artifacts were discovered, along with the skeletons of three individuals of giant stature! Pottery dating to the Seleucid era (323–64 BCE) as well as Roman era remains (64 BCE–312 CE) were also discovered.

During both the Seleucid and Roman occupations, the town surrounding the immense religious monument was known as Heliopolis, the “City of the Sun,” and the sun god Jupiter was the focal point of the shrine. (The Roman god Jupiter had overtaken and supplanted the Greek god Zeus, and replaced the earlier god Baal, who incidentally shared some common characteristics with Zeus and, subsequently, Jupiter.)

Archaeologists now agree that Baalbek is more than nine thousand years old, with continual settlement dating from the Neolithic Age to the Roman Iron Age. Surrounding the site are massive walls built with twenty-four monoliths, weighing some three hundred tons each. The tallest wall, on the western flank of the temple site, contains what is known as the trilithon, a row of three stones, each 19 meters long, 4.3 meters high, and 3.6 meters broad, cut from solid limestone. Each stone weighs approximately eight hundred tons. Even with today’s technology, moving them into place would be a tremendous architectural accomplishment indeed.

According to David Hatcher Childress (2000): “Large numbers of pilgrims came from Mesopotamia as well as the Nile Valley to the Temple of Ba’al-Astarte. The site is mentioned in the Bible in the Book of Kings. There is a vast underground network of passages beneath the acropolis. Their function is unknown, but they were possibly used to shelter pilgrims, probably at a later period.”

How then was Baalbek constructed? Ancient Arab writings explain that the first stages of Baalbek, including the trilithon and other massive stone blocks, were built following the Great Flood at the mandate of King Nimrod, by a “tribe of giants” (Childress 2000). Again, we see the same giant motif, lending credence to the race of giants theory. How could so many disparate cultures in so many isolated locations all around the world arrive at the same supposition: giants were responsible for building the great megalithic monuments of prehistory? Another significant megalithic site needs little introduction. We are referring, of course, to the glorious Stonehenge, perhaps the most famous megalithic structure in the world.

One fascinating story concerning Stonehenge is a twelfth-century account written by Geoffrey of Monmouth in his work Historia Regum Britanniae, also known as The History of the Kings of Britain. Geoffrey maintained that the rocks of Stonehenge were healing rocks that had been imported from Africa and that they had immense curative properties. Collectively called the Giant’s dance, Stonehenge had, according to Geoffrey, originally been constructed on Mount Killaraus in Ireland.

The fifth-century Arthur-like figure Ambrosius Aurelius, at the behest of Merlin, designated Stonehenge to be instead a monument for the knights who perished fighting off Saxon incursions. Thus, the king dispatched Merlin, Uther Pendragon, and fifteen thousand knights to Ireland to capture the monument and bring it back to Britain. The knights slew seven thousand Irish warriors, but were unable to move the rocks with ropes and brute force. Then something very strange happened. Using the power of sound, Merlin dismantled the stones and transported them through a dimensional rift directly to Salisbury, where they were reassembled using levitation. Ambrosius Aurelius then died and was buried within Stonehenge, which is also known as the “Giants’ Ring of Stonehenge.”

Until recently there has been no accurate method for pinpointing when the stones were quarried and erected. However, a new dating method known as chlorine-23 has now been developed. Recent attempts at using this new method on Stonehenge have revealed that the monument, far from being only 4,500 years old as is maintained by current academia, in actual fact dates to 25,000 BCE.

Mainstream scientists have rejected these figures and, subsequently, do not consider this method of dating to be reliable. However, the method is deemed to be highly accurate. (Except when it contradicts what the establishment wants to believe as opposed to what the facts clearly point to!) In rebuttal, established academicians claim that the proponents of chlorine-23 themselves are merely seeing what they want to believe, in a total reversal of the truth!

http://www.renegadetribune.com/aryan-giants-build-european-megaliths/

Sweden: 8,000-Year-Old Skulls on Spikes Dug-Up From the Bottom of a Lake

Andrew Anglin

Daily Stormer
February 14, 2018

We should remember that we evolved through blood and violence. Always, we should remember the people who died – and killed – to bring us to this point.

And in that we must understand that we have a duty to do the same to secure future generations.

RT:

Archaeologists digging at the bottom of a former lake in Sweden have discovered an ancient burial site containing 8,000-year-old human skulls mounted on wooden stakes.

The gruesome find at the Kanaljorden site in the town of Motala in the central Sweden has left researchers baffled as, according to a study published in the journal Antiquity, it the challenges modern “understanding of the handling of the dead during the European Mesolithicera.”

The skulls showed signs of blunt force trauma that was “probably the result of interpersonal violence,” the study read. However, some injuries show signs of healing, meaning that blunt force trauma is not necessarily what killed them.

Some 11 adults, only one of which had a jawbone, were found at the ancient burial site. While it was difficult for researchers to determine their sex, at least three were female and six or seven were males. Interestingly, the injuries differed according to sex. Men tended to have truma on the top or front of their head, while women were injured at the back of their heads. Also unearthed was the entire skeleton of an infant who was likely stillborn or died shortly after birth, the researchers said.

Remains of wooden stakes were recovered from two of the skulls, “indicating that they had been mounted.” One of the stakes had broken. The other was at about 1.5ft (47cm) in length. Astonishingly, a piece of brain tissue was also recovered from the skull impaled with the broken stake. This suggests that the skull was cast into the lake soon after death where it was preserved.

History has always been bloody.

It has always required sacrifice of men. And those who refused to fight died. Those who fought often died as well, but they died with honor.

We as individuals are members of an unbroken line, going back to the beginning of life itself. And we have a duty.

And it is in fulfilling that duty that we fulfill ourselves.

Minoan and Mycenaean DNA Show Nordic and Western European Origins

For the first time in history, geneticists at the Howard Hughes Medical Institute have obtained and analyzed the genomes of the founders of two of Europe’s earliest civilizations. These ancient cultures known as the Minoan and Mycenaean civilizations, existed during the Bronze Age, some 3,000 years ago. In an article posted in Science Daily on August 2, 2017: “The new analysis suggests that the Minoans and Mycenaeans share a great deal of their genetic heritage. . . Who these Bronze Age people were – the people who lived in a world dimly remembered in the poetry of Homer – has been a great mystery,” explains Dr. David Reich, an evolutionary geneticist at Harvard Medical School. “We set out to investigate the origins of these ancient civilizations.”

Early Mycenaean Historical Origins

The Greek mainland was long thought to be inhabited by Old European Mediterranean types. In the Second Millennium B.C., an Indo-European group called the Mycenae invaded the Peloponnesus, and established the Mycenaean civilization. This period is what historians call the Homeric Age, so named because little is known about this epoch except what is gleaned from Homer’s epic poems The Iliad and The Odyssey. It was the Mycenaean people who were featured in the epic poems by Homer and they are considered the true predecessors of later Greek civilization. The Mycenaean culture traded with the Hittites, who were another group of Aryans that built a thriving civilization in what is now Turkey. The Mycenaean civilization established a presence on the Western Coast of Turkey and extended their influence as far West as what is now Morocco and as far East as Syria. The coastal civilization in Turkey was known as Ionia and it would become the center of the great tradition of free-thinking scientists like Democritus, Anaximander, Eratosthenes, Euripides, Aristarchus, and many others. Pythagoras was also among them, though his teachings led to more to mysticism and esoteric forms of speculation than hard science. This is one of the earliest examples of Aryan accomplishment. Anyone who does not think the White world contributed to our global civilization, need only start by looking at the Greeks. According to Arthur Kemp in March of the Titans: The Complete History of the White Race: “Mycenaeans are regarded as the forerunners of the classic Greek civilization. They left a magnificent city at Mycenae, whose most famous inhabitant was King Agamemnon. Mycenae was sacked and destroyed in 1100 B.C. by an invasion of another Indo-European tribe, the Dorics.” (Kemp 31)

Origins of the Minoan Civilization of Crete

In a recent study, researchers analyzed ancient DNA from human remains discovered on the Greek island of Crete, not far from the famed palace of Knossos discovered by the British archaeologist Sir Arthur Evans. Most archaeologists and scholars until 2013 continued to support the non-European model for the origin of Minoan civilization. This stated that the culture-founding population of Crete, which had been considered Europe’s first true civilization, was believed to have come from Africa or the Middle East, anywhere but mainland Europe. An earlier study of Minoan DNA conducted in 2013 had put an end this never-ending controversy. According to BBC News, scientists analyzed the DNA of 37 individuals from burials throughout the island of Crete. These burials were thought to date to the middle of the Minoan period – around 3,700 years ago. The study focused on mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) from the teeth extracted from skeletal remains. This type of DNA is passed down unchanged from mother to child. They then compared the mtDNA with that of over 130 populations worldwide. The end result was that their DNA matched not with African or Semitic peoples, but with Western and Northwestern Europeans. The closest matches were Sardinia, Iberia, Northwestern France and Scandinavia – not Africa, Canaan (Israel) or the Middle East.

This new evidence now suggests an alternative racial origin for the Old Europeans or Pre-Aryans, as Marija Gimbutas called them. By examining the DNA of human remains on the island of Crete, which archaeologists class as one of the chief Old European civilizations, it now appears that the Pre-Aryans were not of a different racial stock from the Indo-Europeans at all. Rather, they were of Nordic and Atlantic-Iberian origins from Western Europe and the Scandinavian peninsula. The Pre-Aryans and Indo-Europeans are both the same racially speaking, as the Indo-Europeans. The Aryans and Pre-Aryans were not racial populations at all, but separate cultural and religious groups created by the genius of the White race. Rather than calling an end to our emphasis on Aryan origins, it just further stresses that we are a united race that once inhabited the far north then swept down and occupied much of the ancient world. In this respect, Old Europeans are not the same as the Mediterranean peoples, which now are evidently of mixed race. In ancient times, the phenotype of Europeans was homogenous, and undeniably Nordic. Since we are without a question a race which, predominately, speaks an Aryan language and is part of an Aryan culture, the best word describing our ancient heritage is “Aryan”. Further studies done on DNA samples taken from North America to the Central Asian steppes indicates one fact: at one time the White race was the dominant force on planet Earth, and that our seemingly impending demise has been in the works since the beginning of our racial history. Hitler pointed out that since the first stirrings of human civilization, it has been the Jews, and the Jews alone, who have maintained their true grip on world history.  It is now time that we take control of the world ourselves, and put the Jew in his place now and forever. Hitler pointed out that a victorious Jew would be “the funeral wreath of humanity.”

I mentioned that the White racial presence extended as far as Japan. There were, in fact, Aryan-speaking Nordics in Japan and parts of the Pacific that do not exist today. Now little remains of the once dominant Caucasian populations that thrived there. However, the power and intensity of Caucasian artistic and technological brilliance, at least in China and Japan, still exists today and those cultures owe such accomplishments to a lost Caucasian race.

The White race manifests itself in many different cultural, religious and linguistic forms. The inherent biology of the White race, with its superior intellect and a profound creative power, is the product of tens of thousands of years. The sequencing of the Minoan genome from Crete shows, for the first time, that the Minoans were of Nordic racial heritage and that is undeniable. More importantly, it shows that Nordic peoples had contact with the Mediterranean world in ancient times, a fact that has been suppressed by academia and the Jewish Marxist establishment for well over a century. That is a significant find, as it opens the doors for further research that will undoubtedly reveal that many of the civilizations of our ancient past, thought to be indigenous or the by-product of non-whites, were not only white in origin, but born from Aryan-speaking Nordic invaders. It now seems that the White race itself is the proverbial spark that started all human effort and civilization.

Ariocentrism vs Afrocentrism: The Truth about Ancient Whites in Africa

How Afrocentrism is Favored by Universities and the Jewish Media

As a researcher you are heavily hit with the realities of censorship and mind-control when you do a simple Google search like “European influence in Africa” and get page after page of writings talking about the fact that Europeans lack any cultural identity of their own and that blacks are the true progenitors of all civilization. It’s at this point you are really struck with cold fear because you realize that stories like 1984, dystopian novels that you believed would never really happen, are real. It is at that point that you stop and see everyone around you and gasp in horror. They all think they are free, equal and happy, living in the greatest nation on Earth, but you see it for what it really is – an oppressive, nightmarish, upside down society whose morals and ideals make no sense at all, and whose crazy concepts of right and wrong defy your own deepest moral and ethical convictions.

Then comes the false history taught to our children – the reality, or rather unreality, of Afrocentrism. While without a doubt, it is great for black children to empower them and give them a sense of racial pride, but when it is taught to our children as FACT, and it is stressed that our people have done NOTHING but undermine the foundation of world civilization, that which the white race, in reality, founded and nurtured for centuries, then that is a blight against our people and all of world culture. It is from the White race, and the White race alone, that all civilization, has flowed since the beginning of human culture. Afrocentrism, when taught beyond the black community, is so absurd, that it angers me to think that a 20 year old black kid with gold teeth, a high school drop out and felon, working at McDonald’s has a better chance walking off and teaching a class at UCLA on his own self-invented Afrocentric theories than I do teaching my own class on Eurocentric history. Even when I’m a tenured, college-educated writer with a trained background in anthropology and he has zero to show for it. The whole reason is that my argument is geared for whites while his for minorities, even though whites truly are the new minority in this country, and in this world for many decades.

A popular book on Afrocentrism, Signifying Indigenous, which proposes that the original inhabitants of the Americas were black not white or Amerindian, makes several false statements within the first few pages. It starts off by claiming that the Amerindians and Africans are closely related, basically the first two on the human evolutionary tree to branch off together. How nice for African and Indian relations! First, there is genetic evidence that recently came to light showing that both culturally and genetically, North American Indians are more closely related to Europeans than they are to any other race or nation of peoples, and that Northern Europeans, or Nordic peoples, and American Indians share a common ancestor, the North Eurasian or Baikal Eurasians which can be traced back almost 30,000 years ago, which corresponds with revised dating of when both groups entered Europe and North America. The American Indians are remotely related to Africans, but closely related to us. The book’s author, Marsha Stewart writes:

The argument exists in world history that the Vikings and Celts sailed to America before Columbus. The ancient Celts and first Vikings (early Europeans) were Black people, and the inscriptions found in North America were written by Mande speaking people from Mali who settled many parts of the Americas after 1300 A.D. The Celts were originally Black or Ethiopian people according to the ancient Greek historian Ephorus (405 BC). Tacitus, an ancient Roman historian, wrote about the Celts and the Picts being Black in 80 A.D. The Celts on the mainland of Europe were Iberians or Silures. Although the original Celts were Black, Europeans eventually claimed the name “Celt.” (Imhotep, Ph. D., David, The First Americans Were Africans, 2011).”

For the record, I couldn’t even verify the references of Ephorus and Tacitus she gave as they do not exist. Both the Picts and Irish were often called Black headed or black-haired as opposed to blond or red haired like the Teutonic tribes, but the references are ridiculous. Black Africans, as much as some would like to believe it is true on a humanitarian basis, are not the true founders and champions of human culture and civilization. An honest first glance and this idea is preposterous, even laughable. These people hadn’t even invented the wheel until whites introduced it in the 19th century – no writing, no road system, to permanent form of habitation, no cities, no organized infrastructure of any kind, sizable or comparable even to those of Native American cultures which, as we have seen in previous articles, may have had ancient Aryan roots. Numerous anthropologists, ethnologists, and historians affirmed nearly a century ago, the White race and the White race alone bears that distinction. Why then do we have proof of the construction of Great Zimbabwe and a civilization in Ethiopia and Nubia? Because, there is strong evidence of white intervention. In the case of Nubia, there was not only war between Nubia and Egypt, but also trade, and Egypt, being the Superpower (much the way Russia is with Belarus or the Ukraine), built many of its own monuments, and helped build infrastructure there as well. As with Ethiopia, the country had stood on the shoulder of white giants for thousands of years, as many civilizations had conquered and even colonized it, and the acquired many technologies and skills which they were able to retain for short periods of time, thereby able to build churches and monuments of an impressive variety. Today, however, the residual effects of foreign rule have greatly diminished, and Ethiopia has returned to its earlier form of barbarism.

A team of South African archaeologists in the early twentieth century successfully completed an analysis of the archaeological site of Zimbabwe, and came to the conclusion that it was the by-product of an ancient white civilization. German archaeologist Karl Mauch thought it was built by ancient Israelites for the Queen of Sheba. This appears not to be the case. Later in the mid-nineteen sixties the site was reexamined and determined to be the handiwork of native Africans. Again, it was clear that native Africans did not build the site either. Unlike Gobekli Tepe, which has the existence of nearby sophisticated cultures both post-dating and antedating its construction, Zimbabwe has no such native African culture. There has been proven remains of red-haired mummies in New Guinea and in North Africa. The fact that this ancient white civilization was never further pursued is unfortunate. It could have been a missing link to many mysteries of nearby African lore describing ghost-like spirits or gods with pale faces in their mythology, such as presented in the Dogon tribe of Mali, West Africa, which says pale spirits from the sky gave them sacred astronomical knowledge, the same knowledge that the people of Europe had invented thousands of years into the past.

Credo Mutwa, a 94-year old Zulu shaman, or “Sanusi”, in South Africa, gave a fascinating account that supports this. Credo told researchers from National Geographic in the 1920s that thousands of years ago, prior to the arrival of the white Europeans to Africa, that the native blacks had encountered blond, blue-eyed beings from the “north.” According to the shaman, such encounters were not limited to one specific encounter or merely to their tribe alone. These same beings had appeared throughout time to countless tribes in ancient Africa. The Africans called them the “Mzungu” or “the ones who traveler about” because they were travelers from a far away land. The name today is corrupted and means “those with white skin.” These “travelers” gave them the rudiments of their traditions, their medicine, laws, etc, and promised to one day return. This future time when the white gods would in fact return had long been expected by tribesmen throughout Africa. According to the Shaman when the local blacks first encountered white European colonialists, the black Africans thought they were the same white “gods” returning as they had promised. The fact that Credo indicates that another race of white people once inhabited Africa, perhaps more advanced than our own and of an advanced type thousands of years ago, matched up nicely with some new genetic data which has recently come to fruition.

According to author and anthropologist Robert Sepehr in Species with Amnesia:

Native African genomes still contain signs of ancient mixing with other species (not present in non-African DNA) Furthermore. In 2012, another study tested three sub-Saharan African populations (Pygmies, Hadza and Sandawe) and also found that the ancestors of modern Africans interbred with different species of hominins around 40,000 years ago; the same DNA is not found in the genomes of non-sub-Saharan Africans. The median time of the most recent common ancestor of the African test subjects with the putative introgressive haplotypes was 1.2 – 1.3 million years ago That means it was over 1 million years removed from not only modern humans, but also from anatomically correct humans in the fossil record. The final conclusion in a study recently published in Science is that sub-Saharan Africans form a distinct lineage of their own, very distantly related, if at all, to that of existing Caucasian and Asian lineages.