Here’s a case in point. In Greco-Roman times, major texts received commentary from later writers who would place additional information, excerpts, and other notes in the margins of manuscripts of major poems. These notes have the name “scholia,” and they are a major source of information about innumerable authors and subjects that survive nowhere else in ancient literature.
Here’s what the scholia on Pindar have to say about the lyric poet’s encounter with a “UFO”:
When Pindar was upon a mountain lecturing a student in 475 BCE, “there was heard a great noise, and a flame of lightning was seen descending, and Pindar saw that a stone image of the Mother had come down at their feet, and the oracle ordained that he should set up a shrine to the Mother.” (trans. Jane Ellen Harrison)
Now, to my mind this seems like a very close parallel to Great Cthulhu and the Old Ones who “had, indeed, come themselves from the stars, and brought Their images with Them.” However, I’m fairly certain this can’t be the real explanation.
If you are an AAT, you ought to read this as an encounter with an ancient astronaut. Clearly, the noise and flame must be the advent of a UFO. We know this because this is how Erich von Däniken has interpreted other ancient moments of noise and flame. In Chariots of the Gods, von Däniken asks of the Mahabharata: “How can the chronicler give descriptions that presuppose at least some idea of rockets and the knowledge that such a vehicle can ride on a ray and cause a terrifying thunder?” So, there’s our spaceship.
The “stone image of the Mother” must be an alien in a gray space suit, since Tsoukalos has informed us that aliens wear space suits and ancient people frequently mistook those spacesuits for metal or stone. On the August 25, 2011 edition of Ancient Aliens, Tsoukalos explained that the aliens’ space suits reflected sunlight, which ancient people mistook for golden crowns. So, there’s out space visitor, unless von Däniken’s theory from Odyssey of the Gods that Greek statues were really alien robots is correct. But for our purposes, I don’t think this much matters.
Of course, this interpretation is pure fantasy. The traditional reading of the passage is that it records a meteorite hitting the earth (as per Jane Ellen Harrison), though some modern scholars prefer to read the entire passage as a dream (as per H. S. Vernel).
The takeaway, though, is that this type of material, appearing only in the scholia and specialist literature, makes little or no impact on ancient astronaut theorists, whose sources are primarily popular, not academic. But without a command of the fine details of the history they purport to rewrite, how can they ever make anything but the most superficial of arguments?