|
Book
Review:
"The Origin of Culture"
by
Thomas Dietrich
|
The Aim of the Book
 In
his book "The Origin of Culture and
Civilization", Thomas Dietrich aims
to bring together diverse "sciences"
used by the ancients to give a
complex and holistic picture of the
world, and to show that people in
ancient times had a knowledge of the
world and the universe which modern
science and philosophy are unable to
grasp. As suggested in the subtitle
of the book - "The Cosmological
Philosophy of The Ancient World View
Regarding Myth, Astrology, Science,
and Religion" - the author makes use
of symbolic languages which are not
considered "scientific" in modern
times. But by tracing back the
thinking and worldviews of the
ancients he finds a complete picture
of the Universe, disguised in
symbolic language, which he
deciphers step by step.
The Main Hypothesis
Thomas Dietrich claims that the
origin of culture is Atlantis, the
lost island, minutely collecting
information from ancient sources and
mythology. According to his research
Morocco is one of Atlantis' first
colonies, from where Atlantic
culture spread first to Ireland, and
from there to Libya and Egypt.
According to Dietrich, culture
spread from West to East, while
civilization spread from East to
West. He carefully differentiates
between culture on the one hand and
civilization on the other:
-
By culture he means religion,
gods, myth, science, history,
philosophy -> Culture is a
spiritual reality which
transcends this world.
-
Civilization comprises cities,
states and empires, power and
politics, wars, etc.
Civilization is connected with
enticements of this world.
Both movements - the West to East
movement of culture and the East to
West movement of civilization - can
also be observed in terms of
astrological cycles. Civilization
follows the cycle of the precession
of the zodiac, whereas culture
follows the cycle of the centre of
our galaxy through the zodiac. The
first is considerably shorter than
the second, the so-called "Great
Year" of the precessional cycle
lasts for 26'000 years, whereas the
latter, the galactic cycle can last
anything from 40 to 200 million
years. Both cycles follow opposite
directions. Dietrich goes on to
project the two cycles onto the
geography of the Earth, and by this
method follows the movement of their
corresponding ages. He draws up
connections between cosmological
cycles and the movement of culture
and civilization on Earth.
A very special point was reached
when the two cycles were at a
crossing point, the cycle of culture
moving from Pisces into Aries, and
the cycle of civilization from Aries
into Pisces. Projected onto the
Earth, he finds Jerusalem at this
crossover, suggesting that, with the
coming of the Messiah, a completely
new era had begun. Throughout the
book, Dietrich supports his thesis
with evidence from a wide variety of
sources including mythology,
astronomy and astrology.
The extent of detailed information
he presents, suggests that the
author must have researched for
almost a lifetime. The book unfolds
like a big puzzle: there are many
pieces, and the connection between
them may not appear immediately
apparent. But as the author presents
his evidence the connections become
clearer and the picture turns into
an intricate whole. The
philosophically less experienced
reader may find the wealth of
information rather overwhelming, and
may sometimes wish for a clearer
line of argument or a thread to
follow.
The Role of Astrology
The ancients viewed the world in
terms of macrocosm and microcosm,
wherein the humans are the microcosm
of the whole universe. Reversely, it
takes a whole universe to produce
life Earth. The human body
corresponds to the body of the
universe, the parts of the body
correspond to the signs of the
zodiac. Observing the cycles of the
planets and of certain sensitive
points and relating these cycles to
each other, can give information on
movements and developments on Earth.
Although Dietrich uses astrology to
understand developments on the
planet over long periods of time,
and deals with different
astrological ages, he denies the
validity of personal astrology. In
his view, "the real astrology, the
real fundamentals of the science,
which are cosmological and sacred,
stemming from long research and
divine inspiration", can only be
used to learn about the "fate" of
the Earth, but not about individual
human beings, except a few "great
personalities" like Napoleon,
Alexander or Hitler, who "have
slipped
into the stream of fate". Here,
personal fate has co-joined with
the fate of the nation they govern.
They enact the fate of the world,
whereas all other people are merely
observers.
Dietrich considers personal
astrology without merit because it
would be too complex, considering
all hereditary and other influences
and the complex structure of an
individual. Furthermore, he thinks
that Ptolemy erred when he assumed
the idea of the tropical zodiac. As
astrologers who deal with personal
astrology and horoscopes, we are
inclined to think that Dietrich
stops half-way. His reasoning that
the human body is the microcosm of
the universe would seem to
contradict his rejection of personal
astrology. This attitude is not in
tune with the rest of the book where
he minutely describes how the
complexities of civilizations and
cultures are reflected in cosmology.
Why should this intricate whole stop
when it comes to individuals. But
this is a discussion which need not
be held here.
On the Whole...
Dietrich gives a lot of information
and presents us with an
interpretation of the historical
developments on Earth which should
be of interest to modern science as
well as mythologically and
astrologically minded people.
The author himself says about his
book: "We cannot advance
scientifically, nor can we form a
philosophically-correct image of
this world, without the information
that the ancient people have so
patiently collected for us, and have
transmitted over such immeasurable
periods of time. There is an
important message to be told - and
to be heard."
The book can be
ordered at:
www.amazon.com
Reviewed by
Karin Hoffmann
|
|
|
Bryn Mawr Classical Review
2006.07.02
Dietrich on Afonasin on
Thomas K. Dietrich, The
Origin of Culture and
Civilization. Response
to
2006.06.32
Response by Thomas K.
Dietrich (Eartholder@aol.com)
First of all, I would like to thank the
Bryn Mawr Classical Review
and Professor Afonasin for
handling my interpretation
of the subject material. The
review by Afonasin was very
candid and complete.
However, it failed to
recognize
the ground-breaking
achievement of anyone ever
even attempting to cover the
subject of "the cosmological
viewpoint of the ancient
people". In this respect, I
feel grievously
under-appreciated.
A
disproportionately large
amount of all classical
literature is devoted to
mythology and astrology. It
might, therefore, be
auspicious to try to fathom
the ancient fascination with
these subjects; and to try
to enter into the ancient
worldview in order to
understand their
interpretation of these
subjects.
Jean Baptist Biot, Charles
Piazzi Smyth, Sir Norman
Lockyer, Alexander Thom, and
others have pioneered the
discipline of
Archaeoastronomy. This
department is still in its
infancy, yet every
archaeological site under
investigation is currently
vetted for astronomical
alignments. I think that the
excellent presentation of
the astronomical complexity
of the Chaco Canyon site by
PBS-has popularized this
movement. All ancient people
believed in the concept of
the heavens as an instrument
of terrestrial events -- "on
earth as it is in heaven".
The
Origin
of Culture
has attempted to serve as a
primer on Classical
Astrology (via Ptolemy,
Manilius, etc.) as a
function of the ancient
Cosmological Viewpoint.
These people were enamored
with the universe as a
religio-scientific context.
Of course, their viewpoint
is anathema to modern
thinking -- but, I cannot
help feeling that my book
has tried to express their
concept in a responsible and
intelligent format. This is
an invaluable guide to
better explore and
understand the antiquities.
The
reconstruction of the
ancient idea that historical
cycles of Culture and
Civilization are connected
to known astronomical cycles
is without a doubt a feature
of ancient belief. The
worldview of current
cosmological science is
pedestrian in comparison to
the advances that the
ancient people have already
made. For example: Our
current academic science
does not generally teach the
revolution of our solar
system around the Milky Way
Galaxy. Our present day
science does not coordinate
celestial and terrestrial
maps under one system of
longitude and latitude. Our
current Geographic Prime
Meridian is not based upon
cosmological science -- but
rather, upon the modern
historical-political
ascendancy of Britain. It is
therefore quite difficult
for the general public to
fathom ideas that they have
not been presented with in
school. I have tried to
present the ancient
cosmological viewpoint in
the simplest terms possible.
I know that when I am
presented with a new idea
that I need to read it over
twice, or even three times.
Professor Afonasin avers
that my
Atlantic-Mediterranean
Cultural progression is
"without any justification
of a rational or historical
nature". I feel that I have
presented a valuable
compendium of mythological
and early historical
material actually written
down in ancient sources
which admits that
Mediterranean cultures have
their roots along the
Atlantic seaboard, and
especially in Morocco.
I
was sorry to see that
Professor Afonasin felt
compelled to trespass into
the regions of unkindness
when he presumed that I
regarded "all previous
research in the field ...
now obsolete." In truth, I
find it remarkable that
Greek-Egyptian mythology
presents such a cogent
record of distinct past ages
of intelligent humankind.
This pattern of ages has
helped me understand many of
the riddles of Mesoamerican
mythology, which I hope to
examine in a new work
hopefully coming out in
2007.
Astrology, as it is
understood today, and
occultism do not interest me
in the slightest. My
motivation was to explore
the worldview behind the
voluminous tomes about
classical astrology and
mythology -- in order to
discover if their roots were
based upon fact and science.
Attempts to dig hard ground
in academia often result in
blunted tools and the
exhaustion and
disappointment of the
researcher -- yet sometimes
the most arduous excavations
are the most rewarding. I do
thank Bryn Mawr Classical
Review and Professor Eugene
V. Afonasin for stimulating
my drive for further
investigations. |
|
HTML generated at 10:17:02,
Saturday, 01 July 2006
The
Origin of Culture and
Civilization, July
17, 2007
The Origin of
Culture is an intriguing
exploration into how symbols
and other cultural
information are passed from
one society to the next in
myth and religious dogma.
The premise of this book is
that much of our seemingly
forgotten human past was
actually recorded in oral
tradition and myth as
symbols and repetitive
sequences. This information
was then passed onto to
other cultures which
modified the names of the
places and major characters
to suit their own specific
cultural needs. Nonetheless,
clues to the original
message and meaning of the
piece stayed somewhat
intact. This information
included information about
our human origins as well as
scientific and astronomical
knowledge of the world
around us.
The Origin of Culture is
written with a slightly
Gnostic viewpoint. Thus,
much of the information
presented focuses on
potential Atlantian and
Ancient Egyptian connections
of the cultural and symbolic
materials. Despite this
bias, the author does an
extremely thorough job of
detailing and examining
Classical literature,
ancient maps, and Celtic
iconography for these
purposes. Thus, whether you
agree with this tradition or
not, if you are interested
in mythology or cultural
symbols you may find this
information very valuable
and rather intriguing.
|
|
|
Paul of Goodreads Inc.
Ancient
history gets a very different treatment in this book, by
looking at the scientific basis behind ancient mythology and
astrology.
The country of Ireland deserves a much more important place
in ancient history than it has received. According to a
compendium of Irish history printed in 1625, the most
ancient inhabitants of Ireland were a race of skilled
navigators, astronomers and builders of forts and castles
called Sea Kings, from Morocco. The Killamerry Cross
contains Egyptian, Greek and Roman geometric principles and
whose iconography has nothing to do with Christianity
(presumably pre-dating Christianity). If one superimposes Da
Vinci’s "Vitruvian Man" (the one with four arms), which came
several hundred years later, over the Cross, the proportions
are exact. The Cross is near a very old observatory at
Knockroe. An ancient road was built right through it, so it
was abandoned a very long time ago.
There is a cycle of world culture which generally moves from
west to east, from the Atlantic to the Mediterranean, where
culture is thought to have started. At the same time, there
is a cycle of civilization which moves from east to west.
Even though they conflict with each other, humanity needs
both of them. It’s not good to have one without the other.
The ancients were quite sophisticated when it came to
astronomy and the universe, knowledge which is only recently
being rediscovered. They had no problem thinking in terms of
thousands, or tens of thousands, of years. If there is such
a thing as the center of world culture, it is a former
colony of Atlantis, which is now called Morocco. From there,
it moved to Libya, which was once covered with forests, and
then to Egypt.
I don’t claim to have understood everything in this book,
but I very much enjoyed it. Those who are interested in
ancient history will love this book. This very interesting
book is well worth the time.
websites
by eartholder ---- copyright
2005-2010
|
