David Childress, Indian Sewers, and Self-Plagiarism

Remember how I say that old claims never die? Or that David Childress is a relentless self-plagiarist? Well, here it comes again. This week the UK edition of the Huffington Post published a somewhat incoherent piece by Abhaey Singh celebrating historical revisionism. Singh attempted to attribute all manner of modern boons to Indian origins (sometimes correctly, other times less so), another theme we’ve found in the ethnocentric presentation of alternative history.

For example, Singh attributes Einstein’s physics to ancient Indian texts. “Prominent German genii from Albert Einstein to the Nazi scientists and inventors who later migrated to the United States or USSR, were eager students of Indian texts such as the remarkably advanced Upanishads.” This is an odd claim that I’ve seen more than once in Indian writing, and it does not follow that simply reading ancient texts implies that these texts are responsible for later discoveries. The claim seems to come from the fact that J. Robert Oppenheimer cited the Bhagavad Gita in reaching for a poetic metaphor for the atomic bomb, the Nazi search for Aryan origins in Tibet, and the myth that Einstein was a fan of Helena Blavatsky’s warmed over Indian mysticism. Like many in India, Singh seems perversely proud of the Nazis.

But you really want to know about David Childress. Singh cites Childress as proof that ancient Indians had superior sewage systems. Note, though, the change Singh makes from Childress’s original. Here’s Singh writing this week:

According to American author of historical revisionism, David Hatcher Childress, ancient India's plumbing-sewage systems were so sophisticated that they are still superior to those of many developing countries today. Large public baths were also in existence in the Indus Valley Civilisation, thousands of years before the creation of similar Roman baths. “A wonder to modern-day researchers, the cities [were] highly developed and advanced. A remarkable early example of city planning.” David Hatcher Childress.

Now let’s go back to Childress’s original, as given in Lost Cities of China, Central Asia and India (1985, rev. 1998, p. 239):

A wonder to modern-day researchers, the cities are highly developed and advanced. The way that each city is laid out in regular blocks, with streets crossing each other at right angles and the entire city laid out in sections, causes archaeologists to believe that the cities were conceived as a whole before they were built: a remarkable early example of city planning. Even more remarkable is that the plumbing-sewage system throughout the large city is so sophisticated, it is superior to that found in Pakistan, India and many Asian countries today. Sewers were covered, and most homes had private toilets and running water. Furthermore, the water and sewage systems were kept well separated.

Note that Childress claimed that the Indus Valley plumbing was more sophisticated than that of India, which Singh isn’t willing to admit, since it undercuts his message of Indian greatness, so he simply cuts it out and replaces it with a generic “developing countries.”

But was this book really Singh’s source? It’s hard to tell. Here’s Childress writing in 1991, in Vimana Aircraft of Ancient India and Atlantis (p. 80):

A wonder to modern-day researchers, the cities are highly developed and advanced. The way that each city is laid out in regular blocks, with streets crossing each other at right angles and the entire city laid out in sections, gives archaeologists cause to believe that the cities were conceived as a whole before they were built: a remarkable early example of city planning. Even more remarkable is that the plumbing-sewage system throughout the large city is so sophisticated, it is superior to that found in Pakistan, India and most Asian countries today. Sewers were covered, and most homes had private toilets and running water. Furthermore, the water and sewage systems were kept well separated.

Here he is in 1996, writing in Lost Cities of Atlantis, Ancient Europe and the Mediterranean:

A wonder to modern-day researchers, the cities are highly developed and advanced. The way that each city is laid out in regular blocks, with streets crossing each other at right angles and the entire city laid out in sections, gives archaeologists cause to believe that the cities were conceived as a whole before they were built—a remarkable early example of city planning. Even more remarkable is that the plumbing-sewage system throughout the large city is so sophisticated that it is superior to that found in many Pakistani (and other) towns today. Sewers were covered, and most homes had toilets and running water. Furthermore, the water and sewage systems were kept well separated.

Here’s Childress in 2000, writing in “Ancient Atomic Warfare” in Nexus magazine (Aug./Sept. 2000):

A wonder to modern-day researchers, the cities were highly developed and advanced. The way that each city was laid out in regular blocks, with streets crossing each other at right angles and the entire city laid out in sections, gives archaeologists cause to believe that the cities were conceived as a whole before they were built—a remarkable early example of city planning. Even more remarkable is that the plumbing/sewage systems throughout the large cities were so sophisticated—superior to those found in Pakistan, India and many Asian countries today. Sewers were covered, and most homes had private toilets and running water. Furthermore, the water and sewage systems were kept well separated.

Now let’s look at his magnum opus, Technology of the Gods (2000, p. 164):

A wonder to modern-day researchers, the cities are highly developed and advanced. The way that each city was laid out in regular blocks, with streets crossing each other at right angles and with each city laid out in sections, causes archaeologists to believe that the cities were conceived as a whole before they were built—a remarkable early example of city planning. Even more remarkable is that the plumbing-sewage system throughout the large cities is so sophisticated that it is superior to that found in many Pakistani (and other) towns today. Sewers were covered, and most homes had toilets and running water. Furthermore, the water and sewage systems were kept well separated.

Notice that each repetition is just slightly different from the preceding one. This means that Childress isn’t just copying and pasting out of ignorance—he’s deliberately recycling text.

As for Indus Valley sewers—they were really great by ancient standards, and it’s true that many Third World countries have poor sanitation and infrastructure, though this was more true for more places in 1985 than today. But it’s also like saying that the Romans had better amphitheaters or the Inca better walls than you’d find in most impoverished areas of the world today: It’s a comment more on the deplorable lack of basic infrastructure and resources in some parts of the world than a testament to “superior” ancient development. After all, the ancient sewers were part of the most sophisticated culture of their day, while Childress compares them to the very worst of our modern world, not the best.

But any claim, once made, will be recycled endlessly. And nothing will stop it.