This past weekend, America Unearthed host Scott F. Wolter appeared on the Secret Teachings radio show to promote his book, Akhenaten to the Founding Fathers. The interview was recorded before the recently published claim by Everett Brown that he had carved the runic inscription on the Narragansett Rune Stone, so unfortunately the interview doesn’t include any reaction from the man who once asserted that the rune stone was the lynchpin piece of proof that the Knights Templar visited America in the Middle Ages. Instead, we got more of the usual mix of conspiracy theories, anti-academic outrage, and self-aggrandizement. “The Da Vinci Code is true!” Wolter proclaimed. “Jesus’ body rising to heaven makes no sense.”
The host begins by asking Wolter to elaborate on his line from Akhenaten in which he writes, “So just what is going on with the academics anyway? Isn’t it obvious by now that people prior to Columbus visited the Americas? And for millennia? Why can’t historians, anthropologists, archaeologists, linguists, and other disciplines see the obvious voluminous evidence of this? As maddening as this is, one has to fight the urge simply to dismiss the nay-sayers.” The surprising thing is not the question but Wolter’s reaction to being confronted with his own intemperate language. He backtracks. He hems and haws and says that there are “many reasons” academics don’t agree with him, some legitimate; and he then quickly switches the subject to the Kensington Rune Stone. He delivers talking points about his testimony in court, and he summarize his usual lines about the Kensington Rune Stone, all of which are painfully familiar to most readers of this post. In this version, he adds that scholars who studied the runes on the stone concluded that they don’t match known inscriptions from Scandinavia in orthography or grammar, but Wolter now calls that evidence of its authenticity, for (a) it is a “unique, coded document” and (b) a hoax would have conformed more closely to known models.
The host notices that Wolter has ducked the question and hasn’t actually explained his own words, and he asks Wolter again to discuss his views on diffusionism. Wolter again falsely asserts that there is a “paradigm” that Columbus was the first European to reach America, which to my knowledge was espoused by Washington Irving in the early 1800s. Since then, hardly a scholar has denied that the Vikings reached North America around 1000 CE, a fact so well known that it appeared in early twentieth century schoolbooks, of which I own an example. Wolter, however, feels that there are “rules” that prevent academics from acknowledging pre-Columbian voyages. That these rules are the rules of evidence not ideology does not cross his mind.
The host next asserts—bizarrely—that Christopher Columbus was a member of the Knights Templar, nearly 200 years after the order was suppressed! Wolter agrees, and the two men disparage the character of Columbus, accusing him of perfidy in falsely claiming to have been the first man to see land. They believe he stole credit from his subordinate in order to claim a pension from the Spanish crown. Columbus did indeed claim the 10,000 maravedis pension upon his return to Spain, but compared to the wealth he earned elsewhere, it would seem that greed was not the real issue. In fact, in 1505 he pressed suit with King Ferdinand to have reinstated his two percent claim on all profits from the Spanish colonies in the Indies for being the commander who claimed it for Spain and governed it as viceroy. Columbus did not want anyone other than himself to be given the credit for discovering a transoceanic route to what he believed was Asia, and therefore behaved in a dishonorable way, but a way that belies the fact that he was not as Wolter asserts privy to secret Templar routes to America. If he really had high quality maps to America, he would have known when to be on deck to see land.
In response, one of the new claims Wolter makes is that the Knights Templar were also present in Central and South America, presumably as the “white gods” of legend. He claims they mined silver to “mint” in Europe, which would be interesting since the Templars were not sovereign and were not able to mint their own coinage.
Wolter claims that Native Americans and the Templars share a “similar ideology,” which apparently did not extend to coinage, the alphabet, crops, or any of the other markers of culture one would expect to cross on (non-existent) Templar ships. He says that the Templars had commerce with the New World for “at least two thousand years or longer,” which is amazing since the Templars were only founded in 1119. He must be referring to those mysterious “proto-Templars” he’s always going on about, the ones who forge lead crosses in Arizona but otherwise have left not a trace in history, and brought nothing back to Europe either.
Wolter claim that Columbus’s wife, Filipa Moniz Perestrelo, was the daughter of a grand master of a Templar successor group, the Knights of Christ. Her father, Bartolomeu Perestrelo, was an Italian who moved to Portugal and became a Knight of the Order of St. James. A century earlier, Henry the Navigator had been master of both the Order of St. James and the Templar successor group, the Knights of Christ. This seems to be the origin point for unsupported fringe claims made by Baigent and Leigh (of Holy Blood, Holy Grail fame) that Perestrelo was a master of the Knights of Christ. Wolter, of course, simply takes the fringe version at face value. This is slightly better, however, than in Akhenaten, where Wolter falsely claimed that Columbus married into the Sinclair family. Wolters says that “historians wouldn’t have that information” about Columbus’s Templar connections, but Wolter himself does. “It’s too much for them,” he says, especially the “fact” that Columbus sailed to Nova Scotia, particularly Oak Island, during the 30-day gap in the historical record of his 1477 trip to Iceland. No one knows for sure whether Columbus actually traveled to Iceland that year (it might have been a boast), but Wolter is happy to extend to the trip to Oak Island due to the alleged “Sinclair” connection (cf. the Zeno narrative as well) and the Holy Bloodline.
Wolter next claims that the Templar “cross of Lorraine” appears on the Bat Creek Stone, and that the Templars were “blood brothers” with the Algonquin in order to impregnate Native women with Jesus blood: “They put it in the Natives intentionally,” he said.
After this the host and Wolter try discussing the Holy Bloodline, and Wolter says that the “people who found the Talpiot tomb” have made new discoveries about the bloodline of Jesus “that I can’t talk about” because “Roman Catholic interests” are trying to suppress the information. It’s all so confusing. Wolter also says that he’s working with “very closely” with the Masonic Knights Templar, whom he views as a Templar successor group. The heroes and villains switch sides seemingly at will: Was Columbus a villain for lying and deceiving, or a hero for preserving Jesus blood? Why can Wolter talk in secret with the Masonic Templars but somehow a conspiracy of Catholics is out to get him? So, is this bloodline good or bad? Sometimes there’s a secret family that Wolter says “rules the world” as a freedom-crushing dictatorship but other times the evil Papists are threatening to destroy the beautiful, noble Jesus-spawn. I can’t follow it.
“We have the DNA,” Wolter says, of the man “who’s buried in the box labeled Jesus, son of Joseph” in the Talpiot Tomb. Yes, Wolter claims to have the actual genome of the Son of God. Presumably, that’s one of the secrets he wasn’t supposed to tell anyone. Wolter then denies Christianity’s central mystery and proclaims that the Resurrection never occurred (as Muslims do today in venerating Jesus as a prophet). Instead, he claims that Jesus was initiated into a spiritual resurrection through Egyptian rituals that became part of Freemasonry.
Returning back to an earlier theme, Wolter repeats his claim that there is a “cover-up” designed to promote a Columbus-first paradigm and deny the truth about the Templar Bloodline clan; but I thought these families controlled the world? Didn’t you just say that? Who is powerful enough to stop the rulers of the world from revealing themselves? No wonder Wolter is interested in serpent myths: His conspiracy is an ouroboros, eating its own tail.
Other points of interest:
To finish up, Wolter makes one last outrageous claim before signing off. It’s a bit complicated, so let’s try to explain it. In 1787, the United States was operating under the Articles of Confederation, which did not provide for an executive. A Scottish immigrant and Continental Army general named Arthur St. Clair was elected the seventh President of the United States in Congress Assembled under the Articles of Confederation in that year, officially becoming America’s head of state for a one-year period. During his tenure, delegates called for a revision of the Articles of Confederation, which as we all know turned out to be the U.S. Constitution.
Wolter falsely believes that St. Clair was the first president of the United States. He was neither the first head of state of the independent United States (that was John Hanson in 1781, or the Continental Congress presidents before him, depending on how you count) nor the last president under the Articles of Confederation, Cyrus Griffin, who served in 1788.
Because of his mistaken belief, Wolter feels that the election of Arthur St. Clair in 1787 was designed to give Sinclair (or St. Clair or De Santo Claro) family sovereignty over America in the name of the Jesus Bloodline and demonstrate the Sinclair foundations of the country. He asserts that the Holy Bloodline family is the Sinclair family and that the Sinclair name means “holy shining light,” and that this the planet Venus. Venus in turn represents the goddess that these people secretly worship as the divine feminine. He then renames the Bloodline families the “Venus families,” apparently implying an even larger conspiracy beyond even the Jesus conspiracy.
The Sinclair name comes from the Latin sanctus clarus, meaning “the renowned saint,” not “the holy shining light.” (Clarus is an adjective; lux is the noun meaning “light.”) It refers to the famous medieval hermit known as St. Clare. He gave his name to several places in France, one of which became the seat of the Norman-French family who would become our friendly neighborhood Sinclairs.
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.