CHAPTER XIV
THE ORIGIN OF SAVAGERY

In the chapter on the destruction of Mu, I showed how the first savagery originated upon earth. Man was created a civilized being, and the destruction of the Motherland affected only those who survived the catastrophe and made their homes on the barren islands which were left out of the water after the proud cities and buildings had vanished forever.

A nation loses the place which it once held in the world's history when money becomes more precious to the souls of its people than honesty and honor. A universal, widespread greed of gain is the forewarning of some great upheaval and disaster. Civilizations have been born and completed and then forgotten again and again. There is nothing new under the sun. What is, has been. All that we learn and discover has existed before; our inventions and discoveries are but reinventions, rediscoveries.

The orthodox theory among scientists of today is that man came up from a brute beast to a savage, and from savagery traveled on by degrees until he reached civilization.

I do not stand alone when I say that savagery came out of civilization, not civilization out of savagery. It is only those who know nothing of savages who maintain that civilization emerged from savagery.

Baron von Humboldt, in speaking of the wretched groups of Indians he met along the Amazon and Orinoco rivers, naively remarks:

"They are not the crude material of humanity; nor from this state have we arisen. These hapless beings are the last degraded remnants of some dying race which has fallen to this state. Man in a state of nature is a doomed being, doomed to death."

A savage, left to himself, does not rise.

He has fallen to where he is and is still going down. It is only when he is brought into contact with civilization that an upward change in him becomes possible. The savage when brought into contact with civilization does one of two things: he either absorbs civilization and rises, or he absorbs only the vices of civilization, adds them to his own savage vices, becomes more brutelike and falls still lower. Such are doomed to early extinction.

There have been two causes that have evolved savagery among various peoples and both were due to geological phenomena.

At the end of the geological Tertiary Era, the earth's crust had been cleared of old Archaean gas chambers to a sufficient depth for the gases to form belts and to raise mountains. The foregoing is explained in my geological work. Before this time there were no mountains or even high hills. The habitable earth consisted of immense fertile plains thickly populated. In forming the gas belts, the land above was lifted into mountain ranges.

A belt passing under a thickly populated plain in lifting the land fractured it and broke it up, killing most of the people. A few, however, survived among the broken-up mountains. Those which were left on the plains, on the land which had not been raised, suffered a worse fate, for all were destroyed by great cataclysmic waves which rolled in over the plains from the oceans.

This not only destroyed all life, but for a time the productiveness of the land as well.

These survivors could not return to the plains, for there all was desolation. There was nothing to eat, and so great became their sufferings that they ate one another, and thus, through one of the two geological changes - mountain raising - cannibalism was born into the world. In some instances when the mountains went up, large flat areas were carried up with them, and on this land lived the men and women who had once known all of the luxuries of a great civilization. In time, they lost all knowledge of the higher arts and sciences. They became savages and lived as such.

The most conspicuous instance of this sort was the great Uighur Empire of Central Asia. The eastern half was destroyed by the waters of the Biblical "Flood" and all thereon perished. Afterwards the western half went up, forming the Himalaya and other Central Asiatic mountains. Among these mountains were many plateaus, where the people survived and finally worked their way back into various flat countries.

Those of the Uighurs who survived were the forefathers of the Aryan races. In both India and China there are traditions relating to the raising of these mountains, the great loss of life that ensued and the survival of many who lived in the mountains following the great upheaval.

Among the Zulus of South Africa there are traditions that their forefathers were a company who survived during the raising of the mountains in the north.

In South America the whole city of Tiahuanaco went up with the great plateau that now exists between the two ranges of the Andes. This is told by the inscription on the great door that is so well known to archaeologists, on the shores of Lake Titicaca.

In most mountainous countries there are traditions concerning the raising of the mountains. The raising of mountains is referred to in the Bible, in one of the psalms of David, called the Song of Moses (Psalms 90:2).

Scientists of today, in judging the character and advancement of a civilization, lay great stress on flint arrow and spear heads. Thus they say that, because the arrow and spear heads of Neolithic times were of a higher type of manufacture than these same articles during Paleolithic times, the Neolithic men were more civilized than the Paleolithic men.

I do not say that our scientists are wrong: but this evidence does not appeal to me as showing the state of a civilization, except in the reverse way, namely: the Paleolithic men were more civilized than the Neolithic men, and there are many opposing facts arrayed against the scientists' theory.

It is quite within the realms of reason to believe also that, at the time the flint arrow and spear heads were being fashioned, conditions were somewhat similar to those of today in this respect, that all individuals were not equally expert in manufacture. A trained mechanic turns out a perfect article, a novice, an inferior and crudely formed one.

The men of the Paleolithic times were novices, but were they less civilized? Personally I think not. These novices were the remnants of highly civilized people, suddenly thrown on their beam-ends by one of the many convulsions of the earth during what is called Paleolithic times.

The assertion that the more crude and primitive a stone arrow or spear head is, the more highly civilized were the people who made them, may seem illogical on its face; but think - carry your mind back to ancient times, and see how man repeatedly was robbed of everything except his bare hands, and thrown entirely on nature's resources. Tools and everything else were gone; absolutely nothing was left except the brains and the fingers of the survivors.

Without the slightest knowledge of mechanics, these remnants had to commence making tools out of nothing but the stones at their feet. Could anything but the crudest forms be fashioned by them without experience and without knowledge? I think not.

To me, these crude arrow and spear heads do not show savagery or a low civilization. They show a high civilization passing down into savagery.

Thus the scientists' Paleolithic men were of a higher civilization than the Neolithic men who followed them, and as the manufacture improved these human beings went down.
 

Back to Contents