Nobility and Race Jason Thompkins evolaasheis
You sort of moved us in that direction. Our question was just a way of suggesting that we do not care whether this or that artist or scientist of the past was or was not Jewish when it comes to perceived ‘achievements’. An artist or a scientist’s racial origin becomes relevant insofar as his work has an influence on his environment and on the minds of his contemporaries. So-called profane art, which for centuries remained the property of patrons, could not become a conditioning tool before it was made easily accessible to all, before most conditions were met to give it visibility.

Part of our afterword to the second edition of ‘Three Aspects’ examines and discusses the statement that Semitism “can be identified even where, in a civilisation, there is no clear and direct ethnic connection with Semitic races and Jews”. It was made by an author who did not take seriously the possibility that “the early anti-traditional, critically minded, anti-religious and ‘scientistic’ upheavals within ancient Greek civilisation were favoured or initiated by Jews.” The evidence was still there for him to realise that most philosophical schools in Greco-Roman antiquity were founded, if not by Jews, at least by Middle Easterners. Even though no particular civilisation is specified by J. Evola, there are grounds for thinking that the reference was at Scandinavian and Germanic countries, as well as at Great-Britain. Here, we are not going to repeat what we have already pointed out regarding Evola’s view, drawn from Günther, that “the Germans, since the times of Tacitus... appeared to be very similar to the Achaean, paleo-Iranian, paleo-Roman and Northern-Aryan stocks that had been preserved, in many aspects (including the racial one), in a state of `prehistoric' purity”, a view which, in ‘Revolt’, is partially qualified by the acknowledgement "that during the period in which they appeared as decisive forces on the stage of European history these stocks lost the memory of their origins, and that the primordial tradition was present in those stocks only in the form of fragmentary, often altered, and unrefined residues," (https://evolaasheis.proboards.com/thread/8/jewels-papacy). Let us bear in mind that, due to the present lack of archaeological data, the reconstruction of the whole past of ‘Aryan’ people, including on the European soil, is largely speculative. As far as we can see – we have just skimmed through it – ‘Culture and kultur race-origins; or, The past unveiled; being lectures delivered at the Calcutta University in 1919’

(https://archive.org/details/culturekulturrac00hannuoft) is a thorough and well-informed critical study of the various related theories ; maybe a member will have time to read it before we do, and can review it. Here, we just want to take the opportunity which was given to us by de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohr_(Heraldik) to ask a simple question : had you had to design your own coat of arms, would you have incorporated a black head into it?

According to Tlefranc research, 20% of the coats of arms of (French) noble families bear features which are not part of the Nordico-Aryan symbolism, such as stars and crescents. More de Maine, More (de) Beauvoisis, More de Paris, Morelet des Forges Bourg, etc., there are ten pages of patronyms, mostly aristocratic ones, with a root in ‘mor’ in the ‘Armorial Général’(available at google.books) Not to mention countless similar patronyms in other European countries : Moor de van Immerzeel, Mordeysen – Saxe, Moor de Gand Middelbourg, Morelli, Moorman, Moore, Moreau, Moorrees, etc. Pushkin had a blackamoor figurine on his desk to remind him of his great-grandfather, Abram Petrovich Gannibal.

Numismatics, too, testifies to the Negroid features of quite a few aristocrats, kings and queens, from Mary of Burgundy, Mary of Spain to Frederic III, elector of Saxony, James I, and the Habsburgs.

Finally, there is, as reported by Tlefranc, a Moor's head in Dürer's coat of arms. Of course, most scholars or researchers who claim that this or that artist or scientist is of Jewish ancestry have an agenda, but, irrespective of the actual racial origin of the artist of scientist in question, the strategy you mention is only going to work, if Whites, whether in the full sense of the term or not, take for granted that this or that artist or scientist is biologically white and that his/her work conveys a typically white vision of the world, and, precisely, if they feel threatened in their ancestral integrity, and that an essential supra-individual part of themselves is taken away from them, by aforementioned claims.

Let us quote again C. Labo “What prevails [in ancient Hellenes] is the disdain for infinity, this rebellious, shapeless, notion. Hellenic thought finds it perfect that which is complete, defined, and, therefore, bounded, that which forms a harmonious and organic whole. Only a few isolated thinkers, such as [the mixed-race] Anaximander [of Milet] spoke reverently of the sanctity of infinity. But Eastern influences soon imposed this view, which, with the advent of Christianity and also with some progress of modern science, has become ours: for us, it is infinity which generates the finite ; it is the finite which is a pure negation and limitation of infinity. This is not the only time that religious superstitions, whether social or scientific, put modern thought squarely at odds with [the Hellenic spirit].” (Aristote, 1922)

God, to Aristotle, is essentially finite (see ‘L'infinité divine depuis Philon le Juif jusqu'à Plotin : avec une introduction sur le même sujet dans la philosophie grecque avant Philon le Juif’, 1906). This equation between perfection and the finite is found in the Aryan mythological symbols, taken from the bright sky ; “the supreme Aryan ideal is the ‘Olympian’ ideal of unchanging, perfect essences, removed from the lower world of destiny, bright as the sun and sidereal natures,” while “the Semitic gods are essentially gods that change…” Perfection and the infinite ceased to be conceived of as opposed at some point in Antiquity and their union began in Plotinus. The Bible, Philo the Jew, and Numenius had paved the way to this change. Nowadays, on the contrary, infinity is seen as the highest level of perfection and as the divine attribute par excellence. The whole of what is called ‘modern civilisation’ is entirely based on the quest for the infinite, on the exploration and on the mercantile quantification of the infinitely small and the infinitely big. www.usdebtclock.org/ might be the best illustration of the spirit of modernity, with its “mathematically-based contemplativeness”.
Last Edit: Oct 28, 2019 at 9:12am by Evola As He Is
Evola As He Is
Administrator
*****

Evola As He Is Avatar

Posts: 165Male

Oct 25, 2019 at 10:53am
Post Options
Post by Evola As He Is on Oct 25, 2019 at 10:53am
The Mystery of Blood
Otto Forst de Battaglia

I would like to present here an abstract of a short study titled "Das Geheimnis des Blutes" ("The Mystery of Blood") published in 1932 by the Austrian genealogist Otto Forst de Battaglia ( de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otto_Forst_de_Battaglia ) dealing with some questions regarding the ancestry of the ruling houses of (old) Europe. Since this survey basically deals with matters, which were repeatedly addressed by Evola, in particular race (blood) and nobility, it might be of interest for the members of this list. It must be emphasised however that some of the conclusions drawn by this author significantly differ from what Julius Evola would have deducted from the material. It also has to be pointed out that Forst does not tackle the fundamental problem, which in the first place would establish the theoretical basis for the subsequent investigations of the historical data, namely the definition of "race", which after all is the subject matter. In this regard it has to be taken into account that, obviously, Forst did not have any DNA data at hand. This limitation of method, however, might be regarded as favorable in this regard since it entails an abstraction from the mere biological sphere.

It is, by the way, interesting that Forst does not mention the "Semi-Gotha", a historical-genealogical handbook published in 1912 trying to trace Jewish blood in German noble families, or the preceding catalog "Geadelte jüdische Familien" (Entitled Jewish Families).

In general, this short study seems to be well-founded by data, since Forst can resort to hundreds and thousands of pedigrees of members of all classes and nations of Europe, which he does (and can) not present in detail. Instead of exhibiting a vast quantity of material this study is presenting the essential results of these investigations and a number of conclusions from them in a condensed manner. Only a few, not very extensive pedigrees of royal houses are reproduced.

Forst starts from the fundamental fact of genetics, namely that the characteristics of the ancestors will – or more precisely, can - be found in their offspring. He then explains some basics of genealogical study in general, namely the nature and function of genealogical tables and pedigrees for the display of the ancestry and the progeny of an individual. In this context he points out that conventional genealogy has often neglected maternal ancestry, which, from a pure biological viewpoint, is of the same if not even higher importance as the paternal one. [Evola presumably would have voiced some objections here, at least as far as "traditional" societies are concerned. Forst himself later suggests a substantially differentiated view, see below.]

The author then presents some issues particulary pertaining to the genealogy of the higher nobilty, namely 'pedigree collapse' (implex) induced by endogamy. (explained here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedigree_collapse ). Thus, just according to mathematical principles, the influence in terms of heredity exerted by some ancestors is higher than that of others. For this phenomenon Forst suggests the term „intensity of heredity" ("Erbsintensität"). He also sees that some characteristics have a higher potential of being transferred by inheritance and sometimes are inherited by overleaping one generation. Thus, the question of „lines of force" (Kraftlinien) is raised, but has not been sufficiently investigated at the time of writing this booklet.

Pedigrees in general show the national and racial composition of the blood of an individuum and a picture of social stability, rise and fall. Since the relevant research material, namely not only accurate genealogical tables, but also detailed personal data of the ancestors shown in them, is by far the most comprehensive regarding the highest borns, such an investigation can be restricted to this group.

Following these considerations Forst is particularly investigating the pedigrees of Archuduke Franz Ferdinand von Österreich-Este, heir to the throne of Austria-Hungary and of Rupprecht, the last Crown Prince of Bavaria, then head of the Wittelsbach dynasty.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archduke_Franz_Ferdinand_of_Austria
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rupprecht,_Crown_Prince_of_Bavaria

For both, whose situations are representative for the catholic royal houses of Europe, Forst has very comprehensive, unrefuted and complete material available, which has been produced by archive studies over years. Based on that materil the author analyses the nationalities and the social composition of their respective ancestry. The results, which are quite similar for both, can not be reproduced here in detail, but lead Forst to the conclusion that the catholic princes of modern times (Habsburg, Bourbon, Wittelsbach, Wettin) share by and large all the same ancestry.

The author then examines the ancestry of the European higher nobility in general and its national and social composition. All so-called 'extinct' dynasties of the middle ages (Carlovingians, Franconian and Saxon Kings, Hohenstaufen, Luxembourg, Piast, Árpád, Přemyslid and Rurik dynasties, the Byzantine Komnenos and Palaiologan dynasties, the Laskaris, the house of Kantakouzenos, the Angelos and the Doukas families) live on through their female issue in the present higher and lower nobility. The intermarriage of the European royal houses throughout the centuries led to a close relationship between all of them. There are even links to the far east and antiquity. Through the Palaiologues of Montserrat, the serbian despotes and the Komnenic offshoot of the Emperors of Trapezunt, Georgia and the Persian Sassanides there is a link of all European royal houses to ancient Chinese and other Asian dynasties.

Through Zaida of Seville, daughter of Abu-Amr Abbad al Mu'tadid, concubine of Alfonso VI, King of Leon and of Castile (died 1109) and mother of Theresa of Portugal, the Prophet Mohammed is progenitor of all royal houses.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zaida_of_Seville

There seem to exist several links to Genghis Khan through Russian dynasties and Tatar Khan families. For example, the daughter of the Khan Mengu-Timur (a descendant of Genghis Khan), who became wife of Theodore the Black Rostislavich, is ancestor of the princes of Yaroslavl and, consequently, of the Romanovs, then the house of Saxony and, for example, Wilhelm II, German Emperor as well as of the whole European royalty including the British kings. Other links to Asian blood lead through the Jagiellonians via the Rurikids and Tatar princes.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodor_Rostislavich_Black
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mengu-Timur

Forst shows that popes, military commanders, saints, scholars, revolutionaries, poets and even peasants and proletarians (in the social sense) belong, even though very distant and scarce, to the ancestors of the highest nobility.

Forst then analyses the general preconditions, the extent and the result of consanguine marriage/inbreedig/incest and pedigree collapse (implex) in history. Extreme examples are the mexican inka kings, the egyptian pharaos and hellenistic kings, who were the product of marriages among siblings as ordered by their respective (constitutional) laws.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_intermarriage

In contrast to what is usually expected, inbreeding and even incest, according to Forst, do not seem to be per se destructive. Their chances as well as their dangers lie in the intensification of certain hereditary features. For Forst, positive examples are Prince Eugene of Savoy, Frederick the Great, the Seleucids and the Ptolemaic dynasty. On the other hand, the Spanish Habsburgs, in which the qualities of individuals like Joanna the Mad (Juana la Loca) from the House of Trastámara were bred, constitute a negative example.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_II_of_Spain#Ancestry
xenohistorian.faithweb.com/europe/images/Charles_II_Inbreeding.jpg

Regarding the question of the intensity of heredity it shows that not each ancestor of the same generation has the same. In general, the male (paternal) line seems to have a stronger effect in terms of inheritance. In this context Forst introduces the hypothesis that inheritance of a hereditary feature depends firstly on the individual intensity of heredity ("Erbsintensitä"t) of this particular feature/ancestor and secondly on the place of the particular ancestor within the pedigree. In this respect a place is more privileged if it lies closer to a line, which leads to the progeny in the strict male line or in the strict female line.

With regard to the national and racial composition it can be stated that in general regarding all social strata the degree of intermixture is higher the closer it comes to present time. Since the start of the 18th century everywhere the previously absent russian and the jewish blood invades the West, even to circles of which it was generally unexpected. Forst brings some examples for jewish (from Safirov, vicechancellor of Peter the Great), yellow and negro (through Pushkin, Alexandre Dumas) blood.

However, it would be wrong to conclude from the undoubtedly frequent mixture with foreign races that Europa including its most noble circles constitute a complete mix of races. Negro, Mongolian and Jewish blood are exceptions within the genealogy of the upper class and even more so in the lower nobility and in peasantry. According to Forst the cadre is [when this study was issued] constituted by indigenous people.
The Catholic and the Protestant royal houses are almost without intermarriage since the 16th century. Since the difference in the religious denomination has also separated the nations, the ancestors of the Catholic and the Protestant high nobility differ in terms of nationality. The predominance of German blood is higher in Protestant than in Catholic princes.

Until the 12th century the members of the ruling houses are virtually of pure Germanic blood. [Unfortunately Forst does not explain the derivation of this assertion.] A slight admixture of old roman, byzantine-greek, russian-slavic and mongolian genetic material can hardly be noticed. Since the 13th centry, an increasing share of slavic, in particular western slavic and only few south slavic, old latin (from France and Southern Italy), celtic (from Scottish and Irish dynasties) and relatively much greek (trough the byzantine Emperors and magnates) and Armenian and finally Mongolian (Hungarian, Tartar, Kumano-Turkish, Old Bulgarian) blood has been adding.

All in all, Forst comes to the conclusion that the European ruling class is almost in total Nordic-Germanic. This thesis, intuitively captured by racial theorists like Gobineau, Woltmann and Günther, is reflected by the results of the Schmidtian doctrine of cultural cirlces (Kulturkreis; en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kulturkreis ) and is now confirmed by undeniable data. Consequently, in most European countries there is a contrast between a Germanic upper class and the lower classes of different blood. Clearly and with overwhelming weight a fundamental fact becomes visible: European history since the Migration period is characterized by a contrast of a homogenous ruling class to the subject classes, which, outside of Germany and Scandinavia, sharply differs from the rulers in terms of blood. For Forst, this shows the greater ability of the Nordic race to rule but does not say anything about an ethical or spiritual quality of a nation or a race.

The political predominance of the Nordic ruling class has been decreasing since the French Revolution and since that time the racial homogeneity of the high nobility is shattered. For example, the share of Germanic blood in the Habsburg dynasty was constantly decreasing since centuries. The (then) present head of the dynasty (Otto von Habsburg, 1912 – 2011) already is, according to Forst, of mainly non-German and non-Nordic blood.

Another result Forst draws from this study is that there is no strict segregation between the classes. Proletariat, bourgeoisie and nobility are not strictly separated in genealogical terms. There is no proletarian, who does not have kings and no king, and no king who does not have proletarians under his ancestors. Absolute purity of blood is a fiction, relative purity and the separation of classes and nations by different compositions of their blood is a fact caused by natural borders and natural bridges between classes and nations. Forst concludes that we are, so to speak, prisoners, but not slaves of our blood. There still remains a certain amount of freedom.
Evola As He Is
Administrator
*****

Evola As He Is Avatar

Posts: 165Male

Oct 25, 2019 at 10:55am
Post Options
Post by Evola As He Is on Oct 25, 2019 at 10:55am
Now, before developping some reflexions, on de Battaglia’s findings, it is obviously safe to assume, as a preliminary matter, that the author used in his research all the types of primary and secondary sources available to a genealogist of his time, such as land and property records, tombstones, cemetery records, Church records, vital records, etc. It would be interesting to know whether he came across forged records, or even forged genealogies, which medieval monks were so fond of. There is no need to give examples here. In modern times, more precisely in XIXth centuy England, it is well-known that people with quickly-made non-landed fortunes tried to cloak their lowly origins beneath forged genealogies, as well as purchased titles.

Those, still preminilarily, who are not familiar with genealogy were probably not aware that maternal ancestry tended to be “neglected” in early genealogical researches. A layman would think that a genealogist, in reconstructing a family tree, would explore both lines, the maternal as well as the paternal, as far as possible, but, now that we think of it, it is true that it is not rare to find a family tree representing only the paternal line, when it comes to the higher nobility. Since a person's Jewish identity is based upon the maternal line, this might account for the indifference of conventional European genealogy towards the latter. It is indeed very interesting that de Battaglia does not mention the “Semi-Gotha” (‘Jüdischer Adel: Nobilitierungen von Juden im Europa des 19. Jahrhunderts’ by K. Drewes is a rather enlightening study on this subject, yet, as indicated by its title, it deals only with the XIXth century. As to the ‘Semi-Gotha, see semigotha.blogspot.fr/). As to J. Evola, none of his racial works call into play the distinction between paternal and maternal line.

The title of de Battaglia’s work suggests that his study was meant to be more than of the genealogical order, and, in this regard, he was indeed expected to first give a definition of race. However, while raciology and genealogy are obviouslty complementary fields of study, the latter being one of the instruments of the former, genealogical research is primarily concerned, by definition, with biological lineages. On the other hand, it seems that his concept of “Erbsintensität” might be compared to the mendelian notion of dominant and recessive genes.

Then, failing a clear-cut definition of the concept of race, if we try to reconstruct it from his considerations on the matter, what we arrive at is a characterisation loosely connected to blood. Rather, it seems to be based on national and social factors. “... popes, military commanders, saints, scholars, revolutionaries, poets and even peasants and proletarians (in the social sense) belong, even though very distant and scarce, to the ancestors of the highest nobility”, but this leaves unanswered the question of the racial origin(s) of this “highest nobility”. (*)

This leads us to conclusions of his that appear as rather contradictory. According to him, the “European ruling class [of his time] is almost in total Nordic-Germanic”. How is that supposed to fit with the statement that “The political predominance of the Nordic ruling class has been decreasing since the French Revolution and since that time the racial homogeneity of the high nobility is shattered”? Would this gradual loss of political leadership be the fatal result he mentions of the perverse impact of the admixture of “slavic, in particular western slavic and only few south slavic, old latin (from France and Southern Italy), celtic (from Scottish and Irish dynasties) and relatively much greek (trough the byzantine Emperors and magnates) and Armenian and finally Mongolian (Hungarian, Tartar, Kumano-Turkish, Old Bulgarian) blood...”, on the Nordic one, from the XIIIth century onward? Since an “ admixture of old roman, byzantine-greek, russian-slavic and mongolian genetic material can... be noticed”, however slight, “the members of the ruling houses” could be said to have been “virtually” “of pure Germanic blood”, if, as you point out, this assertion was grounded.

Finally, how could the European ruling class prior to the XIIIth century possibly be “virtually of pure germanic blood”, since “Through Zaida of Seville, daughter of Abu-Amr Abbad al Mu'tadid, concubine of Alfonso VI, King of Leon and of Castile (died 1109) and mother of Theresa of Portugal, the Prophet Mohammed is progenitor of all royal houses”?

Charlemagne's ancestry is shrouded in mystery. As we once pointed out, “Very few filiations of the period are proved for many generations ; for lack of comprehensive primary sources and because of their often conflicting content, actual genealogists acknowledge that they are often reduced to using guesses, the most convincing of which are often based on onomastics, in reconstructing the family tree of the Carolingians”. Failling the means of deciding the race of the body of Charlemagne, the Dutch author Los once attempted to find out the race of the soul and the race of the spirit which was his, based on a careful study of his character, of his policies, of his readings, of his style, of his religiosity, of the imagery he promoted, etc. Beyond the obvious non European character of the biological race of some of the main crowned heads of the past, a similar investigation should be carried out for these.

(*) By the IVth century , the ‘Syrians’ had taken control of trade in France, and they gained it in Italy a few centuries later. “Under the Merovingians in about 591, Cumont states in ‘The Oriental Religions In Roman Paganism’, they had sufficient influence at Paris to have one of their number elected bishop and to gain possession of all ecclesiastical offices. » (2) From the 1st to the mid-8th century, there were nine ‘Greek’ popes and two ‘Syrian’ popes. Saint Evaristus, the fifth Pope, is said to have come from a family of Hellenised Jews. Victor I, the 14th Pope, is described as African. Between 687 and 752, 13 of the 15 pope elected were Greek-speaking: two were ‘Sicilians’ (one of them, Sergius I, was actually the son of a Syrian), four Syrians, and five ‘Greeks’ (that is, Easterners). In 685, a Syrian-born archdeacon had become pope as John V. In fact, at the begiining of the 8th century, “the leaders of the Roman clergy were Easterners” (‘Europe in the Middle Ages’, p. 144).

As to crowned heads, what are we to make out of all those members of the high nobility from the XIIth century onwards, with Negroid features, at least as portrayed on coins and medals ? (the possibility occurred to us that those published on afrocentric websites were altered, especially as no reference is provided in most cases. However, some of them can also be found on mumismatic websites. See, for example, John Frederic I, duke of Saxony 1532 – 1554, at www.coingallery.de/KarlV/JoFried_E.htm, particularly the lower coin, or Albert Alcibiades, Margrave of Brandeburg-Bayreuth 1527/41-1554 at www.coingallery.de/KarlV/Alcibiades_E.htm, or even Joachim I, Elector of Brandenburg 1499-1535 at www.coingallery.de/KarlV/Zollern_E.htm. In fact, this material is even more edifying than that which is published on most afrocentric websites)

With regard to the United Kingdom, the work of the Scottish folkorist David MacRitchie, who pointed out that the best proof of the Negro origin of some noble Brittish families is the thick-lipped Moors on their coat-of-arms, is worth reading, as well as W.H. Turton’s study on the Plantagenet ancestry. In Elizabeth, “daughter of Edward IV of England, mother of Henry VIII, direct ancestor of the present royal family”, he found, “in only 7000 of her millions of ancestors, several Moorish kings, an Arab born in Mecca, an ex-Moorish slave, named Mujahid, and Leon, a Jew, all peoples known for their Negroid ancestry.” (The Crisis, Vol. 47, n° 2, 1940)

What are we to make out, in still earlier times, of references to “Black Vikings”, “Black Danes”, “Black heathens”, in chronicles – in his ‘Brittish History’, Geoffrey of Monmouth relates that “160,000 Africans”, under one Gormund,”an inhuman tyrant”, “came over to Britain”, possibly from Ireland, to help the Saxons drive the Britons out of the country. In this context, these testimonies should not be dismissed as sheer romance.