Originally, I planned to spend today’s blog post discussing Tom DeLonge’s recent interview in the British music magazine NME, in which he claimed to have secret knowledge that he has adjudged too dangerous for public consumption: “Believe it or not, we have very long conversations about what we’re going to talk about publicly, not because we don’t have the facts – but because people aren’t ready for the facts,” he said. This seems transparently false. If an aging rock star whose sum total of knowledge of UFOs, ancient history, and the occult is derived, by his own admission, from reading old paperback ufology books has experienced “the facts” and emerged unscathed, surely we mere mortals can hear whatever it is DeLonge thinks he knows (but probably doesn’t). I also thought it worth mentioning that Luis Elizondo, who two Pentagon spokespeople have denied served as the head of the Pentagon’s UFO tracking program, declined to provide evidence that he did head it when asked. “I don’t want to make anyone look foolish,” he said. Sure, that’s the reason.
But instead, I want to discuss the summer issue of the Barnes Review, the racist and anti-Semitic publication regular readers will remember because former American Nazi Party leader Frank Joseph praised America Unearthed host Scott Wolter vociferously in its pages. In the July/August issue, the Barnes Review, Marc Roland has an article claiming that the ancient Maya city of Tulum was built by white people, a position straight out of the nineteenth century. The Review describes Roland as “a self-educated expert” on ancient Europe and a frequent commentator for minor right-wing (i.e. “politically incorrect”) websites. Earlier this year, he wrote an article for the magazine about the “mystery” of Oak Island.
In the Barnes Review article about Tulum, Roland claims that Tulum was a monument to “white leadership.” He begins by describing what he sees as swastika symbolism at Tulum, and then he proceeds to discuss the Spanish accounts of the Conquest of Mexico, in which the Catholic friars alleged that Quetzalcoatl (whom Roland identifies as the Maya version, Kukulkan) was a white man from Europe who had given the Mexicans civilization before sailing off across the sea. Although this story is widely believed to be heavily altered by the Spanish (particularly since it conflates the god Quetzalcoatl with the Toltec ruler Ce Acatl Topiltzin), since no native Mexican sources depict Quetzalcoatl as white, Roland takes it at face value and more or less repeats the claims made by Pierre Honoré in his In Quest of the White God half a century ago and Eugène Beauvois in his various works of quasi-scientific racism more than a half century before that.
But Roland goes beyond some of the earlier claims by trying to argue that the “white” god was actually from ancient Egypt, thus answering the open question of the skin tone and complexion of the Egyptians with “white.” Here he tries to connect the Mexican figure to an Egyptian one using the kinds of evidence popularized by Augustus Le Plongeon in his wackadoodle works on why the Maya had fathered the Egyptians. Here, Roland reverses the argument in better keeping with archaeological dating of both cultures:
The Aztecs, in fact, referred to Cortez and his men individually as Calion, an honorific title alluding to one of Meso-america’s flood heroes, and ultimately derived, it would seem, from the Greek deluge figure Deucalion. The closest physical resemblance to the Feathered Serpent in Egypt may have been Wadjet. As the protector of the Lower Nile, she was among the most ancient of deities, apparently known even before dynastic times. Sometimes, Wadjet was represented in the form of a winged cobra—a feathered serpent. As such, she was the standard device on each pharaoh’s crown, an emblem that epitomized his supreme spiritual and temporal power. Seeing the Wadjet prominently worn on the headgear of a visiting culture bearer, the Indians may have named him after his impressive badge of authority.
Well, I for one am totally convinced. But, seriously: The idea that similar sounding words, as channeled through Classically educated European ears, must necessarily be derived from the same source is an amateurish argument that didn’t hold water 150 years ago. The speculation about Quetzalcoatl’s connection to the uraeus on an Egyptian king’s crown is just bizarre. Worn primarily by kings and gods, while the uraeus symbolized Wadjet, it did not typically have wings or feathers.
Roland saves the full-on racism for the end of the article, when he declares that the Maya were ruled by an elite caste of whites from Armenia—basically, the Kardashians. He claims that Mayan is likely an Indo-European language. “These linguistic parallels with Caucasian speech simultaneously support the Maya elite’s Caucasoid identity and suggest that their speech was Armenian-like (Ural-Altaic). It was therefore related, perhaps closely, to the Etruscan and Trojan languages, both Finno-Ugric.”
Weirdly enough, the idea that Mayan was a Ural-Altaic tongue was, if not popular, at least not uncommon in the early twentieth century, but has long been recognized as a false cognate. Roland is copying nearly verbatim from Frank Joseph’s 2004 book Survivors of Atlantis, where we see the same sentence in almost the same words: “These linguistic parallels with Caucasian speech simultaneously support the Maya elite’s Caucasoid identity and suggest that the Atlantean tongue must have been similarly Armenian-like (Ural-Altaic). It was therefore related, perhaps closely, to the Etruscan and Trojan languages, both Finno-Ugric.” Much of the rest of the article is similarly plagiarized, with Atlantis removed in order to sound more serious.
He ends the article with another lie, falsely claiming that guerilla warfare is named for Gonzalo Guerrero, a white man who joined the Native Mexicans and fought against the Spanish. Roland approvingly quotes an old source calling him a “traitor to his race.” The word “guerilla” actually means “little war” in Spanish, from guerra, or war, and originated in the Peninsular War during the Napoleonic Wars. Guerilla is, in Spanish, the type of warfare, and guerrillero is the warrior.
I’ll conclude by sharing with you a book description for a volume published by the Barnes Review entitled Rise of the Aryans: How Ancient Whites Influenced and Established Global Civilization by Patrick Chouinard. I don’t think commentary is necessary beyond pointing out the obvious, that this racist tome attempts to reclaim the “ancient mysteries” genre from the crypto-racist ancient astronaut theory and restore it to its original purpose, unadulterated white nationalism, from which it was born in the late 1700s and early 1800s:
All across the world are mysterious and ancient stone structures demonstrating not only advanced building techniques but also an incredibly sophisticated knowledge of archeoastronomy. From isolated Easter Island in the Pacific, to the mountain peaks of the Andes, from the British Isles and the Mediterranean to the steppes of Eurasia, from the arid deserts of western China to the Mississip[p]i Valley of North America, some advanced culture was erecting megalithic structures that baffle scientists and archeologists even today. Once the cultures of the Indus Valley and the Tigris and Euphrates rivers were considered the oldest “real” civilizations, dating to sometime around 6,000 B.C. But the discovery of the Caucasian-built Gobekli Tepe temple complexes scattered across Anatolia changed all that. Dated to sometime around 9,600 B.C., the structures at these ancient megalithic sites have thrown the mainstream understanding of the rise of civilizations into complete disarray. Who built them and why?
8/13/2019 06:03:58 pm
What about the global pyramid phenomenon and the complex edifices at Knossos, Carnac and Stonehenge? Was it really extraterrestrial visitors from some far-off galaxy who constructed them, or is there a more plausible explanation—one grounded in answers right here on planet Earth?
Far right apologist
8/13/2019 07:00:40 pm
But Jason pointed out white supremacist thinking, he’s being overly “political”! Wahhhhhh!
8/14/2019 01:51:23 am
A minor point: Wadjet often did have wings and feathers, an attribute that made it easier to pair her in iconography with her the goddess Nekhbet, who was a vulture and represented Upper Egypt as Wadjet represented Lower Egypt. Wings are about the only thing Wadjet has in common with Quetzalcoatl, and of course the stupidity of Roland's other arguments is undiminished.
8/16/2019 08:43:02 am
Quetzlcoatl is as far as I can tell only portrayed as winged in recent times. Pre-contact Mesoamerican feathered serpent motifs have feathered tails and manes not additional limbs like the Egyptian ones (or the levantine adaptation of those such as the Biblical Seraphim).
8/16/2019 09:04:20 am
In Hebrew the Cobra (depicted on Judean seals in a manner artistically derived from Wadjet) is called the 'winged snake' with the 'wings' referring to what we call a 'hood'. Judean art shows cobras with 0, 1 or 2 pairs of wings but the book of Isaiah talks about 3 pairs which becomes consistent with the surviving contemporary art if the 'pair covering the head' is identified as the hood.
Jr. Time Lord
8/14/2019 02:32:56 am
I take it from what Jockobadger has seen, we have a new secret aircraft. My guess is people like Delonge are put out in front of it to convince the rest of us it's aliens.
8/14/2019 03:23:59 am
"Circa 10,000 BC, a hunter-gatherer tribe called the Yagahl live in the Ural Mountains and survive by hunting woolly mammoths. The tribe is led by a hunter who has killed a mammoth single-handedly and earned the White Spear, and venerate Old Mother, an elderly neanderthal with shamanistic powers. The mammoths begin to dwindle, and the village chief finds a young girl named Evolet who survived a massacre of her village, perpetrated by what Old Mother calls "four-legged demons" who will come when "the Yagahl go on their last hunt". She prophesies that whoever kills the leader of the “demons” will win both Evolet and the White Spear, becoming the next village chief. The tribe believe that the “demons” are mammoths, whose return will save them from starvation."
Jr. Time Lord
8/14/2019 03:48:30 am
Yes, kent. You have the right movie. The big reveal at the end of the movie... The Pharaoh is white. The movie explains how three white people showed up in Egypt. They called sailing, "flying across the ocean". So, yes. The idea of Egyptian leadership being white definitely reminds me of "10,000 BC". Especially when the characters sailed from somewhere else. The movie even shows priests using a remarkably modern looking map. You have to time pushing the pause button just right to catch a good look. It's only visible for a couple of frames.
8/14/2019 05:33:11 am
He's not the Pharaoh because he neither lives in nor is from Egypt, nor is he shown in Egypt. You might say "Well, Egypt because pyramids" but the movie doesn't imply that way.
Ahab the Arab
8/14/2019 08:14:34 pm
That portion of the movie is mostly Hollywood imagining of ancient Egypt:
8/14/2019 09:18:09 pm
The movie doesn't even necessarily take place on Earth. You're missing the tie-in to Stargate.
Ahab the Arab
8/14/2019 09:48:25 pm
No spaceships, rejuvenating machines, aliens, ray guns or travel portals in this movie. I probably left a few things out further demonstrating that it is not modelled on Stargate but I am not a 40 year old virgin Comic Con fanboy. The white dude is clearly human and arrived via huge wooden sailing ship (clearly visible in one scene and likely influenced by the large ship found in association with Khufu's pyramid ) and the implication is that he came from Atlantis.
8/15/2019 12:56:45 am
I’m not even sure that this debate is happening on planet Earth.
8/15/2019 05:49:48 am
"Connection". I didn't say it was "modelled on Stargate". It was made by the guy who made Stargate and is open to the interpretation that it takes place in the non-Earth "destination" setting of Stargate. Do you understand the concept of "fictional universe"?
8/16/2019 08:48:16 am
There's a difference between an ancient people poetically describing a comet using a term also used for a mythological snake and the concept of that mythological snake being derived from a misinterpretation of said comet.
Ahab the Arab
8/15/2019 10:54:51 am
If you put some effort into it I am sure that you can eventually make the connection between the concept of a fictional universe and the concept of that portion of the movie being mostly a Hollywood imagining of ancient Egypt with other elements included.
8/15/2019 11:24:06 am
I've watched it. I'm just less frozen in my thinking that you are, bless your heart.
8/15/2019 11:50:40 am
"The only thing making it open to the interpretation that 10,000 BC takes place in the non-earth destination setting of Stargate (which would make it modelled on Stargate by the way) is that both places had lots of sand."
8/15/2019 12:29:58 pm
An interesting topic has been brought up. In 1994 Stargate was released. It was 100% Ancient Aliens. Not long afterward Emmerich did another alien film Independence Day. However, at some point later Emmerich read Hancock's Fingerprint of the Gods which he has cited as a major influence on some of his later work, in particular the film 2012. 2012 was made around 2008 within a year or so of 10,000BC. Hancock is decidedly anti-Ancient Aliens and is in the camp with people like Schoch and Bauval who assert that the largest Egyptian pyramids are much older than thought and are based on some ancient advanced civilization. My guess would be that Emmerich kept elements of Stargate as a partial template but made an effort to purge it of all ancient alien elements in order to tie in with Hancock and company's notion of the origins of ancient Egypt and some earthly super-civilization that they think existed around 12,000 years ago, more or less.
Ahab the Arab
8/16/2019 06:33:02 pm
In other words it is a Hollywood imagining of ancient Egypt.
8/16/2019 09:56:50 pm
8/18/2019 10:21:52 am
the features of the Egyptians look at least partly African. they weren't maybe deep black but they weren't "white" either. not enough to be noteworthy for skin difference from south american and mexican locals.
Richard Calumet Joseph aka Piney
12/9/2019 12:24:44 pm
Could you use Frank Collin's real name and the fake one "Joseph" as a aside or in quotes?
Your comment will be posted after it is approved.
Leave a Reply.
I am an author and researcher focusing on pop culture, science, and history. Bylines: New Republic, Esquire, Slate, etc. There's more about me in the About Jason tab.
Enter your email below to subscribe to my newsletter for updates on my latest projects, blog posts, and activities, and subscribe to Culture & Curiosities, my Substack newsletter.
Terms & Conditions
Please read all applicable terms and conditions before posting a comment on this blog. Posting a comment constitutes your agreement to abide by the terms and conditions linked herein.