Nowadays, it can be spoken of 'Aryan' only in the typological sense,
as already stressed by Evola in 'Three Aspects of the Jewish Problem'
in the 1930's (contrary to what is usually assumed, there were far
less references to the 'Aryan race' than references to the 'Nordic
race' in Hitler's speeches). A second essential consideration made by
Evola on race, especially in 'The Elements of Racial Education', is
the following : as there is a hierarchy between the various races,
there is also a hierarchy within each race. In other words, in times
when Aryan was not a mere word, but a reality, not all Aryan peoples'
blood was 'blue' to the same degree ; from the moment the Aryan
people split up into various peoples, which, for some of them, soon
mixed with other races, not all Aryan peoples have ever had the same
quality, the same dignity.
Intra-racial wars, internal strife among the leaders, are one of the
causes of the process of denordisation studied by H.F.K Günther. Pre-
Christian intra-racial wars and post-Christian fratricidal wars
should be distinguished from each other, with respect to the causes
which brought them about. A Judeo-Christian influence has been at
work in the latter : "When the Roman Church through its political
skill in the seventh century destroyed the Arian belief, a strong
check on race mixture had gone. In Christianity itself there were
already lurking dangers for the maintenance of racial purity, for a
saying like that referring to the future life - 'Here is neither Jew
nor Greek, neither bond nor free' - could be misunderstood as a
denial of all racial boundaries in this world. In Southern Europe,
with its thin upper layer of Germanic rulers, the mixing of the races
could not be indefinitely avoided" (
http://www.white-
history.com/earlson/hfk/reoechap6.htm). Race mixing, however, began a
long time before the Middle Ages in other branches of the Aryan
people. Besides the examples of pre-christian intra-racial wars you
have given, that between Achaeans and Trojans, that between Medes and
Persians, another one could be given, which is quite typical : the
wars between Romans and Germanic tribes, which began at a time when
none of those people were effectively christianised yet. Can those
wars be really called fratricidal? "We may call the Germanic peoples
which invaded Rome 'barbarians', but not with respect to the
degenerated Roman civilisation in which those peoples appeared, but
with respect to a higher state, from which they had fallen."
"By 400 AD, within a short space of less than 500 years from the time
of Julius Caesar, the inhabitants of Rome were barely a pale shadow
of the race who originally created the Empire. Immigrants from all
over the Middle East and North Africa had turned it into a multi-
racial melting pot made up of a mixture of Middle Easterners
(Semites, Africans, mixed race Egyptians, Syrians and Africans) and
original remnant Romans, with no national sense of identity or common
purpose.
This integration (sic) process had reached such levels that the Roman
writer Juvenal recorded the increasing habit of many wealthy Romans
of buying blonde wigs to cover their dark hair - the blonde hair
being purchased from Germans and transported south to Rome.
(...)
The 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica adds the following:
"The fashionable ladies of Rome were much addicted to false hair, and
we learn from Ovid, Amores, i. 14. 45) and Martial (v. 68) that the
golden hair imported from Germany was most favoured. Juvenal (vi.
120) shows us Messalina assuming a yellow wig for her visits to
places of ill-fame, and the scholiast on the passage says that the
yellow wig was characteristic of courtesans."
Ovid also mentions the custom of blonde wigs and Pliny went as far as
to give details of the different methods of dying hair blond.
In their mania to conceal their increasing "non-Whiteness", the
inhabitants of Rome used sapa, or lead acetate, as a skin lightener
to pale their complexions - and paid a heavy price by unwittingly
poisoning themselves at the same time.
The Emperor Caracalla - who, as son of a Roman official stationed in
Africa and having a Persian mother, could certainly have been at
least partly racially mixed, was famous for wearing a blond wig.
The infiltration of Roman society by individuals born in all corners
of the world was exemplified by the emperor Philip (244 - 249 AD).
Born in the Roman province of Arabia, in what today is the village of
Shahba, roughly 55 miles south-southeast of Damascus, Philip's father
was a prominent local man, Julius Marinus, who had been awarded Roman
citizenship and was thus not a native born Roman. Nothing is known of
Philip's mother. Known as 'Philip the Arabian', Philip was an emperor
who was clearly not of pure European descent: this bust accurately
captures his short 'peppercorn' hair, an obvious sign of non-White
ancestry.
This mixed polyglot itself was divided into two economic classes, a
very wealthy minority and a desperately poor mass. The wealthy
minority - many of whom had made their money out of the flourishing
slave trade - lived in relative luxury, while the masses lived in
frightful urban squalor.
From this population the Roman army was unable to raise the
enthusiasm or quality of man needed to man the frontiers: and so the
wealthy ruling classes of Rome paid huge amounts in bribes and
mercenary fees to keep their enemies at bay.
Rome precariously survived on money rather than physical strength.
Germanics threatened Rome's borders, and Germanics made up the armies
defending the same borders. This tactic was employed by both Western
and Eastern Roman Empires, with the Western Empire using Germans, and
the Eastern Empire using Goths. In what was ironic but nonetheless
predictable, the last battles in Italy fought under Roman banners
were between armies of German Romans, Gothic Romans and Frankish
Romans." (
http://www.white-history.com/hwr19.htm)
It can thus be legitimately stated that the "real cause of the
dissolution of Roman power" lied in the fact that "the Romans
themselves disappeared."
If they were not able to restore what still remained of Nordic in the
Mediterranean world, the Goths and the Visigoths were still able to
inject a new blood, more Nordic, into a population of degenerated
Romans, regenerating them from the point of view of the race of the
body and of that of the soul, managing, on the political plane, to
save Roman institutions, institutions which were not devoid of
spiritual content, and which were to give birth subsequently to
feudalism.
Thus, far from being destructive on the spiritual and political
plane, those 'fratricidal' wars had a positive effect on European
civilisation, in the sense of an elimination or, at least, of a
relative neutralisation of degenerated elements by worthy elements of
the same stock.
--- In
evola_as_he_is@yahoogroups.com, "brightimperator"
<brightimperator@y...> wrote:
>
> Evola's assessment of the Templars (incidentally a subject touching
> me personally) couldn't be clearer: "Among the various knightly
> orders, the Order of the Knights Templar was the one that more than
> others overcame the double limitations constituted, on the one
hand,
> by the mere warrior ideal of the secular knighthood and, on the
> other hand, by the merely ascetic ideal of Christianity and its
> monastic orders. The Order of the Knights Templar approached more
> than others the type of the `spiritual chivalry of the Grail.'" [p.
> 128. The Mystery of the Grail]
>
> "The destruction of this order coincides with the interruption of
> the metaphysical tension of the Ghibelline Middle Ages… This marks
> the beginning of the decline of the West." [p.129]
>
> Hypotheses as to the relationship between a manipulative Judaism
and
> the Templars apparently didn't exist in Evola's mind. Hardly any
> other group or order receives this type of commendation in his
> works. If the speculations concerning the destructive ambiance
> surrounding the Knights Templar have a basis, is Evola's competence
> so low as to allow such a grand mistake on his part?
>
> Also, Aryans are, after all, Ares-born and their dynamism explodes,
> unfortunately, even intra-racially; Aryans have a longstanding
> tradition of reckless fratricidal warfare destructive of the lineal
> continuity of their own higher castes (Achaeans vs. Trojans, Medes
> vs. Persians, etc). Are the machinations of Judaism or Judeo-
> Christianity really necessary to effect this "Nordic depopulation"?
>
> As to the Crusades, which are seen by some in a quasi-
conspiratorial
> fashion, Evola declares: "The historical context in which the
> Crusades took place abounds with elements capable of conferring
upon
> them a potential symbolical and spiritual meaning. The conquest of
> the `Holy Land' located `beyond the sea' in reality had many more
> connections with ancient traditions than it was first thought;
> according to these traditions, `in the ancient East, where the sun
> rises, there lies the happy region of the Aesir and in it, the city
> of Ayard, where there is no death and where journeyers enjoy a
> heavenly peace and eternal life'" [p. 124. Revolt Against the
Modern
> World]. This Ayard, which obviously corresponds to Asgard, home of
> the Norse 'deities' (i.e. ancestral nobility) and heroes,
remarkably
> existed, before its memory was wholly mythologized, as an ancient
> Persian satrapy and Aryan religious center called ASAGARTA, located
> not too far geographically from the battle-scenes of the Crusades.
> (One must recall the designation `Germanii' originally goes back to
> an Irano-Aryan Persian tribe). See the facts here:
>
>
http://www.livius.org/saa-san/sagartia/sagartia.html
>
> So, in a sense, to the Ario-Germanic aristocracy of Europe, their
> deep ancestry being what it was, the Crusades could be intuited as
> an attempt at a sort of homecoming by the Sons of Asgard, and a
> general reclamation of an Asia Minor once subject to the domination
> of the Aryan race.
>
> Evola: "The struggle against Islam, by virtue of its nature, shared
> from the beginning several common traits with asceticism…
Jerusalem,
> the military objective of the Crusades, appeared in the double
> aspect of an earthly and heavenly city (Jerusalem was often
> considered as an image of the mysterious Salem ruled by
> Melchizedek); and thus the Crusade became the equivalent in terms
of
> heroic tradition of a `ritual', a pilgrimage, and the `passion' of
> the via crucis.' Moreover, those who belonged to the orders that
> contributed the most to the Crusades—such as the Knights Templar
and
> the Knights of Saint John—were men who, like the Christian monks or
> ascetics, learned to despise the vanity of this life; these orders
> were the natural retirement place for those warriors who were weary
> of the world, who had seen and experienced just about everything,
> and who had directed their spiritual quest toward something higher.
> The teaching that VITA EST MILITIA TERRAM was instilled in these
> knights in an integral, inner, and outer fashion. Through prayers
> they readied themselves to fight and to move against the enemy.
> Their matins was the trumpet; their hair shirts, the armor they
> rarely took off; their fortresses, monasteries; the trophies taken
> from the infidels, the relics and the images of saints." [p. 126-7.
> Revolt]
>
> "During the Crusades, for the first and only time in post-Roman
> Europe, the ideal of the unity of nations (represented in peacetime
> by the Empire) was achieved on the plane of action in the wake of a
> wonderful elan… The analysis of the deep forces that produced and
> directed the Crusades does not fit in with the ideas typical of a
> two-dimensional historiography. In the movement toward Jerusalem
> what often became manifested was an occult current against papal
> Rome that was fostered by Rome itself; in this current chivalry was
> the militia and the heroic Ghibelline ideal was the liveliest
force.
> This current culminated in an emperor who was stigmatized by
Gregory
> IX as one who `threatens to replace the Christian faith with the
> ancient rites of the pagan populations, and who by sitting in the
> Temple usurps the functions of the priesthood.' The figure of
> Godfrey of Bouillon—the most significant representative of crusader
> chivalry, who was called LUX MONARCHORUM (which again reveals the
> ascetical and warrior element proper to this knightly aristocracy)—
> was that of a Ghibelline prince who ascended to the throne of
> Jerusalem after visiting Rome with blood and iron, killing the anti-
> Caesar Rudolf of Rhinefeld and expelling the pope from the holy
> city. The legend also established a meaningful kingship between
this
> king of the crusaders and the mythical Knight of the Swan (the
> French Helias, the Germanic Lohengrin), who in turn embodied
symbols
> that were imperially Roman (his symbolic genealogical descent form
> Caesar himself), solar (the etymological relation existing between
> Helias, Helios, and Elijah), and Hyperborean (the swan that leads
> Lohengrin from the `heavenly seat was also the animal representing
> Apollo among the Hyperboreans and a recurrent theme in paleographic
> traces of the Northern-Aryan cult). The body of such historical and
> mythical elements causes Godfrey of Bouillon to be a symbol during
> the Crusades, because of the meaning of that secret force that had
a
> merely external and contingent manifestation in the political
> struggle of the Teutonic emperors and in the victory of Otto I."
[p.
> 300-1. Revolt]
>
> So perhaps elements of a decidedly non-Judaic or supra-Judaic
> character (Asgard, Melchizedek, Ghibellinism, the Holy Grail,
> Hyperborean symbolism, etc.) were operative here?
>