Thursday, September 17, 2020

the Bear Motif

https://pro2-bar-s3-cdn-cf2.myportfolio.com/bd173e25858cc252e6a86ddb0668c516/dbe633fe-fd22-45e1-a91f-a59c7bfa8ce0_rw_1920.jpg?h=fdad3e9679630a036ef41b092a90eaf9

Even only three posts in, I can already say with confidence that a great portion of this blog will involve the comparative analysis of the European and Asian races and their civilizations, culture and languages. In analyzing anything, whether it is a physical object or abstract concept, we are immediately met with a number of conspicuous facts which are displayed outwardly. However, in every case there are a second set of latent facts, which exist hidden beneath the surface, but are no less true. Such is also the case in analyzing the European-Asian complex. In our case, what presents itself outwardly are the vast differences that are most commonly noted between the two, especially in the cases of culture and language. What more often eludes ready detection, on the other hand, is a common thread of fundamentals from which these two civilizations are ultimately derived.

The reader must not misinterpret me in this. I am not suggesting that the European and Asian races and their civilizations are not different. That is most certainly false; it is like saying a brother and his sister are not different. What I am saying is that the differences in reality merely represent two polar trajectories which emanate from a common source. They are different, but they are also related. Now that is an equally bold statement, but it shall not go without evidence. Analyzing into antiquity, and inspecting the mountain of archaeological and philological material left behind by both races, we are able to view the development of these two trajectories, and from this an observation many will find surprising emerges: the further back into history we inspect, the more these two "separate" races begin to resemble one another

In this post I will discuss one notion that manifests itself in the ancient prehistory of both Europe and Asia: the motif of the bear.

Among the proto-Indo-Europeans, the bear was most certainly regarded as a creature worthy of great respect and of great fear. Although the exact location has long been the subject of debate among philologists and archaeologists, that primeval nation, which was the seed of the European race, dwelt deep within the heartland of the Eurasian Steppe, and so would likely have had frequent encounters with the creature. A testament to this sentiment among the Indo-European peoples, which has apparently survived the test of time, is the naming taboo that emerged in many of the daughter languages of proto-Indo-European. In those languages, the PIE root for bear, h₂ŕ̥tḱos, was replaced by a euphemistic term. In English, for instance, the word 'bear' is ultimately derived from a different PIE root, namely bʰerH, which means 'brown' or 'the brown one'. Likewise in Russian, медве́дь (bear) means literally, 'the honey-eater', having replaced the original word. Certainly among the Indo-Europeans the bear was so revered and so feared, that there was the belief that even uttering its name was a sign of disrespect, and this lead to the development of the taboo among the northern IE diaspora groups, particularly the Germanics and Slavs. However, in most of the southern diaspora groups, occupying geographic areas where run-ins with bears would have been less common, this original strand had died out, which is why in Greek and Latin we find words derived from the original h₂ŕ̥tḱos: ἄρκτος and ursus.

The naming taboo for the bear, which certainly must have been congenital in Indo-Europeans back to the pre-migration era, tells us a lot about the greater cultic role of the bear in IE culture. According to Indo-European and the Indo-Europeans, a voluminous tome that explores in-depth the proto-Indo-European language and the people who spoke it, the bear cult was second in significance only to the wolf cult among the proto-Indo-Europeans. The bear and the wolf represented the masculine, energetic element within two separate domains. The wolf was the master of the social domain. He brought order to and enforced the laws of the tribe, and consequently maintained the tribe's unity. Thus the wolf was personified as the king or the chief. The bear, in contrast, was the master of the biological domain. He was seen as a prolific force, an agent of fertility, whose seed brought forth the future generations. In this way, the bear was the bringer of life, but, being a frightening creature, he was also the bringer of destruction. In this way the bear embodied the greater cycle of creation: birth, life and ultimately death. Thus the bear was often personified as a father, a grandfather or some other kind of ancestor.

There are also notable cases where the bear is personified in a female sense, as a mother or ancestress. Clues regarding this facet of the bear cult show up from time to time in the folklore of various Indo-European peoples. For example, in the Latvian epic poem Lāčplēsis, the titular hero, whose name means 'bear-slayer', kills a bear by ripping apart its jaws. Later one finds out that Lāčplēsis' mother was herself a she-bear, from where he has inherited his superhuman strength. A she-bear cult was definitely alive among the Celts, who worshiped the goddess Artio. Her name itself is derived from h₂ŕ̥tḱos, and is very likely cognate with the name of the Hellenic goddess Artemis. In Greece, Artemis was originally worshiped as a bear goddess, but eventually this depiction of her fell out of favor and was lost in all places except Brauron, where rituals dedicated to the bear goddess Artemis were performed by girls who took on the appearance of bears by wearing bear skins. Artemis Brauronia was also known for her wrath--another echo of the original bear deity that was qualified as both a creator and a destroyer.

But, as we shall see, the bear cult and the entire mythological motif surrounding it was not limited to the Indo-Europeans. In fact, bear worship and the presence of 'bear totems' are found throughout the Eurasian Steppe and the lands which are proximal to it, particularly among the Altaic peoples. One of the most famous examples is the Korean foundation myth of Tangun. In this myth, a tiger and a bear pray to the supreme god Hwanung, who in response orders them to eat an herbal concoction and retire into a cave for 100 days. While the tiger gives up early on, the bear persists in the cave, and is transformed into a woman, known as Ungnyeo (熊女), literally 'bear-woman'. Later Ungnyeo sleeps with Hwanung and begets Tangun, who founds the first Korean kingdom and as a result is held to be the supreme ancestor of the Koreans. The bear in this myth shares many similarities with the bear in Indo-European myths. For one, Ungnyeo is an ancestress, and therefore cannot but be associated with sexual proliferation and the germination of the future generations. Further, she also is a manifestation of the she-bear motif which also was present in Greece and Gaul, and her myth is very reminiscent of the Latvian epic where the son of a she-bear becomes a legendary hero.

웅녀 (ungnyeo) by l'OrcheStrafottente | BandLab

Primordial China also seems to have its own version of the Tangun myth. The legendary first emperor of China, Huangdi (黄帝), whose name means the 'Yellow Emperor', may have been a reflex of the same bear totem that we find in Korea. According to the myth, Huangdi is the leader of a tribe named Youxiong (有熊), which literally translates to 'having-bears' (The prefix you- (有) is found in many of the names of ancient Chinese tribes, such as Youshen (有莘) and Youge (有鬲), so it might represent a phonological value belonging to an ancient language rather than the literal meaning of 'have'). The main rival of Huangdi is Yandi (炎帝), the 'flame emperor', but the two end up uniting their tribes in order to defeat Chi You (蚩尤). The victorious Huangdi during his rule of the united tribes lays the foundation of a modern civilized society. While I have much more to say on the prehistoric figures who are central to this myth, and their identities, I will leave that to a future post and stick to the aspects of the myth which reflect the bear motif. It is clear that there is a strong association between the clan of Huangdi and bears, as is indicated by its name, which is highly suggestive of the presence of a bear totem. Numerous Western and Chinese authors, such as Remi Mathieu and Ye Shuxian/叶舒宪 (who wrote a book, the Bear Totem: the origins of the Chinese ancestral myth/熊图腾:中华祖先神话探源, about it), have suggested the same thing, lending credibility to the theory. I may also suggest that Huangdi's association with the color yellow may be representative of the bear's skin, as was also the case in the rituals of Artemis Brauronia, whose participants wore chitons of saffron-yellow to symbolize bear skins when real bear skins were not available.

To conclude, when we analyze some of the origins stories and mythologies of various European and Asian nations, we find that the motif of the bear and the bear totem is exceedingly common. The bear evidently occupied a very important position in the universe of Eurasian peoples. Bears are most commonly associated with the concept of sexual proliferation, which is why bear figures are often depicted as the progenitors of races and bringers of life and strength. On the other side of the coin, the bear was also respected and feared for its fierce nature. Overall, the bear motif, clearly native to the Eurasian Steppe, represents a uniquely Eurasian facet of spirituality and of society itself. In future posts I will be discussing a few more of those facets that various ancient European and Asian societies had in common.

Tuesday, September 8, 2020

What is Eurasianism?

First of all I mean to differentiate between the so-called "Eurasianism" of Aleksandr Dugin and what I mean by Eurasianism. That "Eurasianism" is something else entirely, and in my opinion is quite dubious in its name, for it is merely a matter of geopolitics, and advocates a unity of polities for the sake of international convenience and powerbroking, designed to produce a bipolar axis centered around Moscow and Beijing. As such, few outside of that narrow scope would find much reason at all to care about "Eurasianism", because what it really is is "Russo-Sinicism". It's concern lies mainly in accumulating power for the Russian Federation and the People's Republic of China--nothing more. It is only "Eurasian" in that it involves one European power and one Asian.

In contrast, what I mean by Eurasianism is not an alliance of political and geographic entities--mere lines in the sand--but an alliance between races and between civilizations, the marriage and union of two kindred peoples, and the mixed-race offspring which are the fruits of that union. Hundreds of polities have risen and fallen in Europe and in Asia, and in the vast Eurasian Steppe in between. Why should we concern ourselves with only two contemporary ones when we discuss "Eurasia"? Eurasianism then is just as much about the past as it is about the present and the future. It is a continuum stretching back thousands of years, and indeed will mark this planet for thousands more to come. Thus what I mean by Eurasianism is the past, present and future, the attitude, culture, and way of life, of the myriad European and Asian peoples, and the Eurasians, whose heritage is split between the two.

But who is a Eurasian? Strictly speaking a Eurasian is a person of mixed European and Asian heritage, what is commonly referred to these days as Hapa, or by a number of equivalent terms found in various languages, such as ハーフ Haafu, which in the overwhelming majority of cases refer to Eurasians. Because of that it is quite safe to use the terms Eurasian and Hapa or Haafu interchangeably, as I will often do on this blog.

Let us pose another question, who is the Eurasian? Well I say that if Europe is the father, and Asia the mother, then the Eurasian is their son. Certainly he is entitled by his birth to claim with pride the heritage and descent of both civilizations, but he himself has some nature which is not shared by the parents. So, one parent we consider European, and the other we consider Asian, then as for the son, he certainly has inherited the European nature from one parent, and the Asian nature from the other, but in that clash of opposites, is bestowed by what must be God himself a nature which is neither European nor Asian, the Eurasian nature. Certainly the Eurasian is the nucleus of Eurasianism. And just as much as he is the nucleus, he is also the purpose, just as the purpose of any marriage is to produce children.

But even more than the purpose of Eurasianism, the Eurasian, and consequently Eurasianism itself, is the inevitable result of these two races coexisting in the same world. For as long as the two have been separate, there have always been cases of miscegenation between them. And as long as these two races continue to exist, then Eurasians will continue to be born. Contrary to popular opinion, the Eurasian is not a modern phenomenon, the result of the desegregation of a globalized world, but instead Eurasians have come and gone throughout history, and will continue to come and go for many more millennia. This is why when we consider Eurasianism, we must consider the past, present and future, and within that temporal framework, we must consider the interactions between the Europeans and Asians themselves, as well as their interactions with other groups.

So, Eurasianism is in its essence a story, one that was started thousands of years ago and is still being written today. It is the voluminous archives containing the domestication of the horse, the invention of the wheel, pastoral nomadism, legends of gods and heroes, chariots and bronze swords, the thinkers of ancient Greece and China, the conquests of Alexander, Caesar, the Huns, and Genghis Khan, the discovery of gunpowder, the voyages of Columbus and Zheng He, Samurai, knights, castles, grails, kings, emperors, monks, Buddhism, Mithraism, Christianity, Shintoism, Daoism and so on and so forth. There is so much worth discussing, that I don't think even one blog is enough for all of it.

So we have gone over what Eurasianism is, let's touch on what it is not. Most importantly, it is not a political ideology, nor an ideology in any sense of that word. The '-ism' attached to the end of the word is akin to the '-ism' in the word 'medievalism', as in 'the state of being medieval'. Eurasianism is just that: the state of being Eurasian. It does not prescribe a proper form of government, or of thinking or doing, nor does it assert the superiority of one form of government, one religion or one philosophy over another. Rather it includes the numerous political forms and schools of thought that flourished throughout history within the borders of the European and Asian civilizations, and indeed the many strands of thought that were shared by both, ALL of which are worth exploring and NONE of which is entirely useless.

So, to condense things a bit, Eurasianism is about Europe, Asia, Europeans, Asians, and Eurasians, from the most remote time in history to the present day, and evermore into the future, their differences and their similarities, their parting and most recently their union beneath the backdrop of the crisis of modernity.

Monday, September 7, 2020

Opening Post

My decision to finally go through with the creation of this blog was influenced by my simple will to say what needs to be said, and put forward a line of thinking which has been dormant now for many centuries, replaced by what has been deemed "better". Simultaneously, there is great need to discuss the emergence of a new current in the endless cyclical involution of history, that being of course being Eurasianism and its potential for the future of civilization in this world.

That said, no topic, no matter how ancient or futuristic its matter, shall remain untouched by me. We must reach the point, where we begin to realize that opposites are meant to be reconciled; that analyzing far enough into the future, it begins to resemble the past, and, far enough into the past, it begins to resemble the future. In fact, this reconciliation, this synthesis, of opposites is the very essence of Eurasianism, which is in its most basic form the (re)union of two races from opposite ends of the earth.

Those who are wanting to more specifically know what is going to be discussed in here, I will say straightly that this blog shall pertain to diverse topics within the categories of history, politics, what is known today as "anthropology", philosophy, linguistics and historical linguistics (philology), literature, as well as technical subjects, technology in general, and commentary on current events.

I will also say it here and now, that in a world of apple trees, this strand of thought is an orange tree. Those who are expecting here a repetition of those strands of thought which come with the blessings of the "experts" and other various "powers that be" that wield influence in our particular point in history will be disappointed, and likely provoked and offended by the medieval, classical, feudal, primitive, reactionary, retrogressive and counterrevolutionary nature of the thought found here. Indeed this blog will be all of those things, and to those who have a problem with it I will gladly show the door--I do not care.

Journal Entry, Oct. 3, 2021: On existence, work and authenticity

I have become slightly acquainted to the truth of existence, work and authenticity. The path of spiritual growth of all things involves s...