Viking Maxxing with Survive the Jive | Know More News - Adam Green
Tom Rousel from Survive the Jive details his documentary work and research into Viking history, debunking claims of non-white ancestry with genetic evidence showing mixed British, German, and Baltic roots. He critiques modern "woke" narratives, defends the term "Anglo-Saxon," and describes Christian conversion as a violent, top-down process contrasting with the 1336 Pilenai Fort suicide. Rousel clarifies his polytheistic beliefs view gods as metaphysical archetypes rather than literal beings, recommends primary sources like the Poetic Edda, and promotes his "Starting Heathenry" course while rejecting foreign philosophical contaminations of native traditions. [Automatically generated summary]
Thank you all for joining me today, Tuesday, March 31st, 2026.
Huge show today.
First-time guest, epic guest, Tom Rousel from Survive the Jive on YouTube.
I have been getting requests for years to have him on the show.
He is a YouTuber, heathen influencer, pagan.
We're going to be getting into some of his work.
I've been binging all of his videos.
Really cool, entertaining stuff.
And he is here to discuss his research, Christianity, a bunch of other stuff.
It's going to be a big show.
We'll play the super chats at the end.
Tom, what's up?
Thanks for being here, dude.
Thanks for having me, Adam.
So, I've been binging your videos.
I really like them.
I like the one, How to Be a Viking.
You did the impersonations of the different pagan influencers that had me dying.
That was just an advert for that was just a joke video.
But yeah, thank you.
Yeah.
And I was watching your Iceland documentary you did recently.
It was really cool.
I've been watching a bunch of Iceland documentaries because I want to go there.
It looks like the coolest trip.
Oh, it was a really cool trip.
I had a really good time there.
Iceland, that was last April.
So one year ago, I went to Iceland and I went with a bunch of American Christians, actually.
And they're really, they invited me to go with them.
They're making a film there.
And I was like, one film that they made about, well, Matt from Nordhooger made about me.
And then I made my own film about the sagas, which are the Icelandic stories from medieval times.
And yeah, I've wanted to go there for so long and visit all the holy sites and places.
So if you go, you can use my film as a sort of like idea of where you might want to go in Iceland yourself when you go.
Although I highly recommend that you don't go in winter like I did.
If you enjoy hiking, that is, because it's a much, much difficult, more difficult country to navigate in the winter.
In the summer, you can hike more easily, although there'll be more tourists.
Did you do the full end up doing the full loop around the island or like the smaller loop?
We didn't do any loop.
We had a specific itinerary which was based on the filming locations that were needed for the film.
So there was no time for the loop.
We were there for about a week.
I encountered some British people doing the loop, some Scots actually, from the Hebrides of all places to go.
Hebrides is the next island down after the Pharaohs.
The Hebrides is a Scottish group of islands that look a lot like Iceland when you're there.
So that's why I found it was funny that Hebrideans went on holiday to Iceland because they probably had to fly all the way south to London, then all the way back north to Iceland to get to somewhere that's almost the same as where they live.
But they were doing the full loop and they actually rescued us on the road when we were hiking and gave me a lift back to our cabin when we got bored of walking along the road in the snow.
Was it crazy expensive as everybody says it is there?
I mean, yeah, it's pricey, especially if you're, I mean, it's pricier than Britain and it's certainly pricier than America where you are used to having high purchasing power.
But I didn't spend a lot of money because I was free accommodation with an Icelander who was hosting us very kindly.
And I, I mean, we mostly ate in, we got our food from the supermarket, you know, bought hot dogs and stuff.
And so we didn't spend a lot of money on things.
And, you know, if you're going out to bars and restaurants in Reykjavik, then you will find that you'll find it quite expensive.
I think it's probably cheaper than Norway.
Okay, cool.
Norway is really expensive, I think.
And the wind, they say like the weather, like weather can roll in, and the wind is so crazy it like blows you over.
Did you see any of that?
Yeah, we did.
I don't know if you got to the bit in the film when we went to Snafler's Nest Peninsula and there's a peninsula off that, which in the saga of Irbegi Saga is very important because the people who settle it were devotees of Thor and they declare that the little hill on the on the Ness on the peninsula is called Thor's Hill, Helgefel or Helgefet in modern Icelandic, which means the holy hill.
And that hill, we wanted to film it.
And then the Icelander who was with us was like, guys, we need to be fast because there's a storm coming.
And the news was saying all Iceland was red weather warning and like, and it was crazy.
And we're like jumping back in the car and speeding back.
And we see like Indian tourists who like crashed off the road into the snow and stuff like that on the way.
Like it was, we got back to the cabin just in time, really.
It was pretty hairy weather at times.
Yeah, I really want to go.
That's, I've, I need to go to Ireland in Scotland.
Two years ago, I went to England and France.
And then last year, or like maybe six months ago, I went to Germany and Austria.
And a lot of your channel seems to be about traveling and making documentaries.
Yeah, it's really cool.
And it's a huge channel, too.
You have almost 300,000 subscribers.
Yeah, I'm a documentary maker before.
I mean, I only started the channel because I was at university making, you know, studying documentary, making film, like media and stuff.
And I just wanted, in 2006, it was like, wow, somewhere we can host videos for free at last.
Because before then, you had to pay everyone.
And that's just 20 years ago.
That's when I opened the channel, April 2006.
I started this channel.
So a 20-year-old channel.
So it's taken a really long time to get to the level it's at.
But the, yeah, I travel a lot.
I've done a film in Ireland about some of my Irish roots and about Irish history.
I've done films in Scotland, Norway, Sweden.
Now, recently I went to Germany and Denmark for a big thing this summer, two-part series called Route to the Angles and Root to the Saxons.
And then, of course, the Icelandic film from last year called Sagas of the Ravenland.
And then I got a second channel called Jive Talk, which is just like streaming like this.
And then just are you working on another documentary or another trip right now?
Or you have one in the works?
No, I've had, to be honest, I've had burnout from doing these films.
It's like so much hard work on those two German films that I just need a break from it.
So I'm just going to do some just normal like streaming videos like this for the Jive Talk channel for a bit.
And also I'm going to have a holiday because and I'm going to write a book because I'm getting a little bit like I've done a lot of filmmaking and it's a lot of effort to edit and make and create these films.
So it's like it's much easier writing books.
Like people who write articles and stuff like that, don't realize how easy they have it.
Like when I write the article, that's 1% of the work done.
First you write up the article, then you've got to go and go to the location, film it.
You've got to edit it down.
That takes months.
So it's like, yeah, obviously people who do writing have a much easier thing.
And they can sell their books.
Whereas I make these films and I just put them up for free.
I don't charge people to see them.
I just say anyone can see them because I want people to know about their roots.
And if I put them behind a paywall, then I'm not achieving what I've set out to do, which is to help people understand about the history of European peoples, about history of pre-Christian religions, where we come from, who we are.
So yeah, I ask for patronage, but I don't like, I don't pay all the best content.
I put it out there.
So I will write a book and then try and sell that to get a bit of money because I need to fund these somehow.
No, it makes total makes perfect sense.
I imagine that was sort of the case.
I can only imagine all the work and travel and money and editing and stock footage and writing that goes into these.
They're really well done.
I'm enjoying them a lot.
I'm going to watch a lot more on your channel.
What did you come up with the name for?
Survive the Jive?
Like survive the lies, the disinfo?
Is that where you're at?
Well, yeah, it's sort of, but it didn't serve.
I mean, originally the channel was called Thomas Rousell when I made it in 2006.
And then the following year, I started a blog called Survive the Jive.
And that was just me being against two things.
Jive meant firstly iPhones because they were launched that year.
And I was really against them because I thought they were surveillance devices for monitoring people, which they are.
And the second was the digital ID card scheme, which the Labour government was trying to push on us at the time in 2007 and Tony Blair's idea.
And they're still trying to push it even now after all these years, but they haven't successfully got it through.
So Jive meant like tech surveillance mostly.
And then in 2008 or 9, I decided to rename the channel after the blog, Survive the Jive, so that the channel and the blog were like in sync and had the same name.
And then around that time, I became a pagan in 2009.
And so a lot of the content started to be about paganism after 2009.
And then I went and did a degree in master, a master's degree in history in 2011.
And then I got much better at making history content because I understood it better.
But The channel name has always stuck, and people have made up like conspiracy theories.
Like, there's a bunch of leftists who said Survivor Jive is a coded racist terminology to be anti-black people or something.
They just make up loads of so much stuff they just make up about me.
Viking Ancestry Lies00:13:28
Left-wingers make it up, Hindu nationalists make shit up, Christians make shit up.
Like, there's people, there's so many different factions that have a big hate boner for me, and they have to make up loads of lies about what I'm doing.
Oh, I know what that's like.
Every different, everybody's got their arrows out, every different faction makes up different lies.
One group's lies will completely be the opposite of the other side's lies.
One side's called you Jewish, the other side calls you Nazi or whatever.
Yeah, I saw, I was googling around for like photos for the thumbnail, uh, which I like, by the way.
I thought the thumbnails turned out super-based.
Look at these, yeah, funk, but yeah, I saw Reddits and hate not hope and stuff attacking you with the typical normal stuff.
That's they're so awful, but um, Reddit's awful.
I'm banned.
Most of the several, I think there's at least three separate subreddits: one for Anglo-Saxons, one for pagans, and one for like other historic history studies, where you are banned for mentioning me.
If you mention my name, then you get insta-banned on several subreddits.
Like quite an honor, really.
Well, did you see what this professor was doing to Alvie?
She's the blonde girl that's also doing like paganism videos.
I'm sure you know of her, right?
Yes, I know of her, and I know of Howard Williams as well.
I know about him because he and I were mutually the target of a target of cancel culture in 2019, 2020.
He's actually himself someone who was attacked by a North American medievalist of color called Mary Rambren Ulm, who was the one who invented this whole scheme to ban the word Anglo-Saxon from academia.
And she made herself president of the International Society of Anglo-Saxonists and tried to get them to change their name.
She's like, pretends to be like into Anglo-Saxon history, but really she just wants to destroy it.
And I exposed her and I showed her like interviews where she's saying, I want to destroy medieval studies.
She's like posing as like this serious medievalist, but she hates medievalism.
Anyway, she attacked him for not wanting to ban the word Anglo-Saxon.
Like in Britain, after they tried in 2019, she led it from America.
I'm not sure if she's Canadian or American.
She's North American anyway.
But they led a, her and some friends, they led a campaign to ban Anglo-Saxon, but a big load of British academics just pushed back.
And most of those were left-wing academics because the word Anglo-Saxon is not a racist word in Britain.
It's like not even left-wing people think that.
Not even Marxists think that.
It's really weird, like weird racial politics in North America that make people think that.
It's like, but anyway, but gradually she's had some effect because Cambridge University has now removed the term Anglo-Saxon from their one of their course names.
But anyway, back in 20 going, that was in 2023, but back in 2020-ish, she attacked Howard Williams because he wrote a blog saying how Anglo-Saxon was a legitimate term to use and not racist.
And then she said, oh, he's facilitating the racists like Tom Rousseau.
He's just like Tom Rousseau, therefore.
And then he wrote a cucky response saying, I'm not like Tom Rousseau.
I'm different.
But he obviously hasn't learned, like he's still, you know, joining in with the same stuff.
But I don't really pay much attention to his work.
But it's quite ironic that someone who himself suffered from cancel culture is happy to cancel other people.
Yeah, he seemed obsessed and he's like, oh, she's pale and skinny and just like make it.
I could tell it was just seething lies about her.
But I'm glad everybody rallied around her and supported her.
And hopefully that all gets sorted out.
That's crazy.
People are trying to ban Anglo-Saxon.
God, the anti-European hatred.
What's wrong?
What could possibly be wrong with the term Anglo-Saxon?
And what did she want to replace it to?
Well, the term that they wanted to replace it with is quite a good term, early English, which I'm happy with.
I'm absolutely happy with calling the Anglo-Saxons early English because the word English was used before the word Anglo-Saxon.
The Anglo-Saxons called themselves English a lot more often than they called themselves Anglo-Saxon.
So that's one of the arguments they used for why we shouldn't use Anglo-Saxon.
And that was okay, I guess.
But the fact is, Anglo-Saxon is a word that they did use to describe themselves sometimes.
And more importantly, subsequently, we use it as a way to distinguish modern English from early English.
So we call them the Anglo-Saxons and that period Anglo-Saxon to show a line in the sand.
Like before the Norman conquest, the English, we can call them Anglo-Saxons.
Obviously, they just called themselves English.
But anyway, the reasoning that she isn't really anything logical like that.
The reasoning is just her saying some bollocks about, oh, in North America, racists called themselves, like you said, Anglo-Saxon.
It's basically that.
Like, some, I can't remember who, some like KKK guy or something, like 100 years ago in America called themselves an Anglo-Saxon.
Therefore, everyone in the whole world has to stop saying Anglo-Saxon.
It's absolutely ridiculous, ridiculous thing.
But she's a Marxist.
She's like, she's actually saying like in an interview, all Anglo, all medieval studies should begin with Margo Hendrix and people like Fanon.
Like these are like extremely far-left, anti-white, black Marxists in America.
Like, how the hell does that help you learn about England over a thousand years ago?
Like some American black guy complaining about how white people are the devil or whatever.
Absolutely insane that someone like that has a job in a university.
It's crazy.
And I led the charge in 2019, like to tell everyone you have to push back on this.
And lots of people did push back after I did that.
But the blowback's been massive for me with several peer-reviewed academic journals in Australia and America describing me as a white supremacist.
And they're all written by.
Oh, your audio cut.
Your audio just cut out.
I can't hear you now.
So like they have this little.
Okay, now it just came in.
It's like it had a delay or something.
Can you hear me now?
Yes.
Okay.
It's much more quiet, though.
Oh, I'll just.
Okay, it's working.
It's working.
I could turn it up.
It's fine.
That was weird.
It just completely cut out and then it kind of lagged for a second.
But it's working now.
You can hear when I tap.
Yep.
Yeah, so she's like collab got all her friends in different academic positions around the world to write in peer-reviewed journals lies about me.
And because it's peer-reviewed, I can't sue them.
So it's, yeah, just Marxist anti-white mafia behavior, basically trying to destroy the life of anyone just for disagreeing with them.
Like, you know, that's it.
Like, Anglo-Saxon, just because I think the word Anglo-Saxon is fine, which is what all academics agree with me, like even left-wing academics agree with me.
So it's not like it's not worked.
What they thought would get away with in peak woke period in 2020 of completely banning English identity is completely falling to pieces now because everyone in England is standing up and saying the English are an ethnic group and the origin of our people is the Anglo-Saxon invasion.
And there's nothing they can do about it.
They're losing now.
You know, if they'll get it changed and then a decade from then they would just go, English is not politically correct and they'll want to change it to something else too, probably to be more inclusive.
And these are the same Marxist leftist professors that are saying Europe's always been diverse and Vikings are black and all of that.
I saw you had some debunks on that as well.
Yeah, the whole Vikings are diverse thing.
I got called up by a guy who was on the paper.
You know, there's a scientific paper came out a couple of years back and it like the headlines were all Vikings are diverse.
And the historian who they consulted for it, Sturla Ellenvorg, he was like, no, they're not.
And that's not what the data is showing.
And he was really annoyed by the way it was being presented.
And then he's like, I want to talk about it on your channel.
And I was like, great, I got him on.
And then the head of the paper, the head scientist on the paper, Esker Vilisev, he is a bastard, to be honest.
Like he just completely cut, he got Stirler fired.
Stirler got fired for appearing on my podcast.
And, you know, like, this is a Dane.
Sturler is a Norwegian and Elenvorg is a Dane.
And he called me a Nazi or something.
Vileslav said I was a Nazi or something.
I can't remember.
But then the local, I mean, the Danish broadsheet, Viken Viesen, I think it's called, it like published an article on this contest saying like, you know, they just described me as an English historian and they didn't go with like what Vilislav was trying to push.
And yeah, I mean, the paper shows like, you know, like the diversity of Vikings.
There's been several other papers since then that have shown this.
Like, yes, the Vikings were actually not pure Scandinavian.
They were more mixed even than modern Scandinavians are.
But they were only mixed with British, German, and very rarely Baltic people.
That's it.
Like, not with like, not with like southern Europeans, let alone non-whites.
So it's like what they know full well that diversity in the mind of people means other than white.
But they were white.
All the Vikings were white.
We haven't found a single non-white Viking or even a Viking with a trace of non-white ancestry if you don't count, you know, a bit of Sami ancestry from northern Scandinavia.
Some of them might have some of that.
But, you know, they were, they were white people.
And yeah, they mixed with British people.
That's true.
But that is not really a big so.
So I'm confirmed a diverse Viking then.
Here's my ancestry.
Since everybody online, all the Christians want to lie and call me Jewish all the time.
Any opportunity to bring this up?
Total Viking diversity here where all the ships weren't.
These are all areas.
These are all regions that the Vikings had ancestry from.
Even modern Norwegians, this doesn't show, by the way, this doesn't show ancient ancestry because this is a modern DNA test.
So this is just showing like your ancestry from the last eight generations or so.
But the modern Norwegian genome includes approximately 25% British ancestry and most of that is from Scotland.
Whereas, you know, also it's the other way, the Irish genome includes approximately 10% Norwegian ancestry from the Vikings.
So these regions of the British Isles and Scandinavia got very blended together by the Viking Age because there was a lot of back and forth.
And that doesn't mean just like, oh, the Vikings carried women over their shoulders and took them back, because we found 100% British DNA Vikings living in Sweden, as far east as Sweden, let alone in Norway and in Iceland, where a lot of British ancestry, a lot more British ancestry in Norway and Iceland than in Denmark and Sweden, naturally, because the Vikings of Norway mostly went to Scotland and Ireland and then up to Iceland.
The Danes went to England and the Swedes went to east and dealt with the Slavs and the Rus and stuff like that.
And they blended in with the Slavs very quickly.
Have you done a test like that too?
Is yours you're from England, right?
Yours is about the same kind of mixed Northwest European?
Yeah, I'm quite like an American in my DNA in that sense because I'm not a pure Englishman.
I'm about 10% Irish, 10% Scottish, and the rest English.
And I'm actually quite like an Australian because my English DNA is a mixture of from the southwest and the southeast.
And those are the two main regions of England that settled Australia in large numbers in the 19th century.
So I get a lot of matches with people in Australia.
And when I went to Australia, very recently, I went to do a talk there and everyone was joking that there's a guy that looked just like me.
And someone, a fan, went up to him and gave him his gifts.
And I think it was me, gave these gifts to him.
And I was standing on the other side of the room and didn't notice it was not the same guy.
But yeah, definitely.
I could see that.
I could see that.
So yeah, I was refreshed to see you got serious credentials.
You've been doing this a real time.
Would you say you had your master's in European history?
Is that what it was?
It was the degree name is Medieval and Renaissance Studies, but I didn't do any Renaissance studies.
I just did, what I studied in the degree was just basically Viking and Anglo-Saxon stuff.
Peaceful Irish Conversion00:14:58
So I was studying written sources for the Viking Age in translation.
So Icelandic literature in translation.
Whereas if I was doing a Norse, a proper Norse philology course, I would have studied the Icelandic literature in its original Icelandic.
But I studied it in translation.
So I'm not fluent in Old Norse, which would be the case otherwise.
And then I studied Anglo-Saxon literature in Old English.
So I learned Old English and studied the Anglo-Saxon literature in the native vernacular of the time.
And then I used the two together to understand the because I consider, and then and now, that the Anglo-Saxon religion and the Viking religion is the same religion, how the process of conversion occurred in Northern Europe in places like England and Iceland and Norway.
Well, yeah, elaborate on that.
That was the main topic I wanted to bring you on to discuss was the Christian conversion of pagan Northwestern Europe, Scandinavia.
So tell us about that.
I know that it was basically, I don't know all the details, but I know that it was bloody, it was imposed, there was coercion.
They got the kings to do it top down.
Why don't we have you explain it to us?
Tell me what I need to know about the Northwestern Europe conversion to Christianity.
Well, it's hard to say, to talk about Northwest Europe in one go because even England, there's several different events that are relevant because England itself was several kingdoms in that time.
And the efforts to convert weren't just like, we're going to convert this region.
They would send missions to different kingdoms.
And then for England, for example, the most famous mission is the Augustan mission, which is also called the Gregorian mission.
And that was sent from Rome.
But it involved the use of non other ethnic groups.
It involved sorts of Franks because the Franks were a Germanic people who adopted Christianity quite early.
And the conversion of Germanic Europe was like a knock-on effect.
If you discount the Goths, who also, some of them converted much earlier, like in the fourth century or before, but they converted to Aryan, the Aryan heresy, which is not really any part of the Catholic world.
In fact, the Catholics hated them.
So once, if you put them aside, the first proper Catholic Germanic people were the Franks.
And once you got the Franks on side, then you used the Franks to try and get an in with the Anglo-Saxons.
And once they got the Anglo-Saxons, the Anglo-Saxons were used to convert the Saxons back in Germany.
And then, and also the Scandinavians, they used Anglo-Saxon missionaries.
So it's like a knock-on effect.
But to get the Anglo-Saxons to be Christian was a difficult process.
It took over 200 years because they arrived in an already Christianized region of Britain, the former Roman colony of Britain, which had adopted Christianity as Rome had, because of the fact that it was the main, it became the main religion in Rome, the fashionable religion as more and more immigrants took over.
And also, like, I suppose it became like an underdog religion because it was the religion, literally, of a rebel against Rome.
So if you were a subjugated people like the Britons were, then it probably appealed more than worshiping Jupiter because Jupiter had the heir of the conquerors and maybe Christianity didn't.
But anyway, we know that by the time the English arrived in the early 400s, in the 400 or mid-5th century, the majority of the Britons were Christian.
There were a few little pockets of Celtic paganism left, or rather Celtic-Roman fusion paganism, because the two, Roman paganism and Celtic Brython paganism had fused into one religion after several hundred years of Roman occupation.
But mostly that was gone.
And the idea that there was like a lot of Celtic pagans in that time is really quite fantasy.
The Irish were somehow converted by a Welsh mission.
So we say sometimes Welsh, the Britons didn't call themselves Welsh.
They called themselves Britons.
And the Germanic English word for Britons is Welsh from whalas, which means foreigners.
Or rather, it means Romanized foreigners.
So they also use the same word to refer to the French whale, and that becomes, in French, the W becomes a G, and they're called Gauls.
So Gaul is a Germanic word for, it's the same as Welsh.
Welsh on Gaul are the same word.
And they just mean Romanized foreigners.
And Romanized in this sense probably to some extent means Christian.
Anyway, the Roman mission focused on the South and getting it in there.
And we know that it involved using Africans, like including even black Africans, because firstly, we got Adrian of Canterbury, who was sent up from having already been a mission among the pagan Franks.
He was then seen as successful in that regard.
So the Pope sent him to England.
Adrian of Canterbury was a Berber.
So, okay, Berbers aren't strictly speaking black people.
They are, you know, a sort of North.
They're a North African people, not black.
But sometimes people like to pretend he was black to try and say how black British history was or some bullshit like that.
But anyway, he was definitely not an Europe.
He was not a European.
He was a foreigner.
And he was used to help spread early Christianity.
But now we know from new genetic evidence that he wasn't the only African that the Pope sent at the time because we have updown girl, which is in a she's buried a Christian with half black, as in real black, like sub-Saharan African black, like Wesley Snipes black.
And she was a quarter black and three-quarters Anglo-Saxon.
So there's no evidence.
Her mum was there in the cemetery, and she's white.
And her grandparents as well were pagan in pagan barrows.
You can see her mum's in a Christian burial next to the pagan barrows.
And then her daughter is black and the father's not there.
So we're seeing a pattern.
We're seeing a pattern that what happens when Christianity is introduced.
So obviously this black guy, because this was in Kent, right by the coast of France, and this is just at the introduction, the first introduction of Christianity.
It's around 600 AD, something like that.
And these, oh, a bit earlier, these early Christians were plugged into French culture.
So they're buried with Frankish pottery.
They're turning away from English culture and towards French culture because they're becoming Christian.
And they're marrying foreigners, even Africans, because they're now only the Christian world is all that matters, you know, can mix with anyone.
So this was what they were doing.
This is how the introduction of Christianity to the north looked like.
It looked like non-Europeans.
But at the same time, the north of England was being converted by a completely different mission.
It was called the Adrian mission or the mission of Adrian or Columba mission, sorry.
And it's a Gaelic mission.
So because century before, a Welsh guy had gone, Patrick had been captured by Irish and made a slave in Ireland, and then he made his way back to Britain and then launched a mission to Ireland and successfully converted them.
Now, I'm not going to talk about how that happened because, one, I have not studied in detail the conversion of Ireland, but secondly, no one actually knows.
The whole St. Patrick mythos is mostly mythology, you know, like banning the snakes and stuff like that.
There's so many legends in Ireland about St. Patrick, and they're actually quite wonderful and interesting, but they're not real.
I don't think even Christians believe that they're real legends because they're all him doing funny magical things.
Anyway, somehow, without an army and without any military presence, the Irish were converted to Christianity, which is quite unique because elsewhere, like in England, it required war.
A lot of fighting happened in Britain.
And some people say, no, it was mostly peaceful.
No, I think you're thinking of Ireland.
It wasn't peaceful in England.
Anyway, the Gaels then launched.
They made a sort of, what do you call like a hub for Christianity of an abbey on the island of Iona, which is off the west coast of Scotland, in between Ireland and Scotland.
And from there, they launched missions to convert the Picts in Scotland and also the early Gaelic people who'd moved to Scotland at the same time the English arrived in Britain.
Those people were called the Scotty.
And from them, we take the modern name Scotland.
And the Picts and the Scotty mixed together to make the modern Scottish people.
But they were both pagan before the Irish mission to make them into Christians.
And at the same time, they sent a mission to Northumbria, which is the most powerful region of England, probably, at the time, in northern England.
And that is what resulted in the north of England starting to become Christian.
And gradually from the introduction of these Irish missions and Italian missions, you get a spread to different kingdoms, one by one by one, saying, pressure this guy, you have to marry this Christian woman.
And then even though traditionally Christian women were told never ever marry to a pagan, you're not allowed to, the Pope and the local bishops said, in this case in England, you will marry pagan men because we want you to undermine him and make him Christian and like use your you know, they're using these women basically as a means to sneak Christianity in.
And there's some evidence even that maybe that happened not just at the elite level, but that there were like residual, it seemed initially, and I used to say this, that Christianity was completely eliminated in England when the Anglo-Saxons came because all the Britons converted to Wodanism and started worshiping Woden and speaking Germanic languages and became Odinists.
And we know from DNA that there are barrows with pagan Anglo-Saxon barrows with a guy buried inside who has no Anglo-Saxon DNA.
He's just a Welshman who's converted to the Germanic religion and abandoned Christianity and gone to Germanic paganism.
But there is some evidence that actually, especially among women, Christianity did survive among some of the Celtic people and they used it maybe via marriages to try and preserve Christianity in a sort of secret way.
Maybe it's not really known for sure.
Anyway, when they couldn't get them via stealth or via threatened threats or whatever, they went to war against them.
And that, long story short, like they basically got all the kingdoms to be Christian by the end of the 7th century.
The last one at the end of the tail end of the 7th century was Sussex and the adjacent island of the Isle of Wight, held out for a long time, and they literally just went and slaughtered them all when they wouldn't convert.
So that's not peaceful.
I don't know why people say it was a peaceful thing.
It wasn't.
It was murder.
And of course, that is not the end of Germanic paganism in Britain because normal people continued to be pagans among the English in the 8th century for a long time, I'm sure.
And even we know that in the 10th century, Christian monks were invoking gods like Woden in magical charms.
They're writing in manuscripts for the church.
So if the monks were doing that in the 10th century, I can't be convinced that normal laity weren't indulging in rituals that we considered pagan.
More to the point, new laws were introduced in the 10th century against paganism.
So why would you introduce a law for something nobody was doing?
So it's quite obvious that there was still paganism in the 10th century.
Someone might argue that that paganism was more influenced by the introductions of the Vikings, though.
After the 8th century, there was a Viking presence in England and in Scotland, and that reintroduced Germanic paganism.
True.
And also we have evidence of Anglo-Saxon monks writing runic charms to Thor, like invoking Thor, and they're not from the old Anglo-Saxon version of Thor called Thunor.
They're in the contemporary Norse language.
So that shows that there was pagan influences.
And of course, we have in north of England then crosses like in the Gothforth Cross, which is a cross meant, which a cross, you know, for worshiping Jesus, but it's covered in pictures of the Norse gods and scenes from Norse mythology.
So there was a big attempt to sort of integrate this pagan religion with Christianity to try and neutralize it.
But yeah, Despite what some people think, Celtic paganism hasn't been a thing in Britain since the Roman times.
Really, like the only paganism that the Christians have had to fight against in Britain has been Germanic paganism in its Anglo-Saxon and Norse forms.
And they used brutal, brutal forces to do that.
And one of the most brutal of all, I think, is Olaf Tryggveson, a Norwegian who, in the Orkney Islands, when the Orkney Islands are now part of Scotland.
They're just north of Scotland, but they were for a long time part of Norway.
So if you consider that part of British history because it's part of Britain now, then you should include the conversion of Norway or of Orkney.
An interesting thing about Anglo-Saxon Christians as well, I can say, is that when Charlemagne or Charlemagne, as they call him, Charles, the brutal butcher, was slaughtering Saxons for honoring the native traditions of Germany.
The Anglo-Saxon Christian, Alcuin of York, had entreated him to be merciful.
Christian Morality Debunked00:15:57
And he had said to him, like, you know, this is just, please don't be so violent towards them.
Don't kill so many of them because they're our brothers, you know.
And previously, an earlier Christian, Boniface, the one who cut down the oak of the sacred oak of Thor, he had said of the Saxons that they are of one blood and one bone with us.
So even the pagan Saxons.
So there was this recognition among English Christians that the Saxons in Germany were their kin and that they didn't like that Charlemagne was killing them, even though they were pagan.
So there was this idea that you shouldn't do that.
And actually Charlemagne himself stopped, he rolled back the penalty, the death penalty for paganism.
So he actually didn't enforce, I know he killed a lot of pagans, but some people don't know.
He actually stopped that, which is basically an admission that theologically, it's not defensible in Christianity to do that.
However, later on in Norway, you get people like Olaf Trygveson who return to this very brutal form of Christianity where they just literally murder everyone who doesn't agree with them.
And then afterwards, they'll say, oh, that was wrong that he did that.
But now that they're all dead, we'll just be Christian, shall we?
So they'll allow temporarily genocide, but then afterwards, they'll say that it wasn't right.
Because actually, it's not theological.
You have to actually voluntarily choose Christianity according to the theology.
So you can't be forced to be Christian.
But they sometimes, you know, conveniently, like temporarily forget that when there are a resisting, a resistant population who refuse to convert.
Yeah, we'll see the Christians will share the meme all the time on the internet of the guy from the Viking show, Ragnar, and then he's holding the cross and they say, oh, the oldest pagan tradition Is converting to Christianity.
Or at the same time, they'll brag that like Christianity is true because everybody converted.
But they'll also say, oh, we cut down your trees and we slaughtered you and we're going to do it again and stuff.
But it did not win out because it was true or because it was better or anything.
It was by force and it was from top down and from bottom up.
It seems to be a both approach, right?
Yeah, I think it's different in different places.
I think initially the rise of Christianity in Rome required a big bottom-up movement from immigrants because there are loads of Middle Eastern immigrants coming in in the Imperial Rome and flooding it and completely changing the nature of Italy.
But later it becomes fashionable among elites in Rome.
And then as much as it was a bottom-up thing to start with, it became a top-down thing in Rome.
And then in Northern Europe, it's primarily top-down in every example.
But there's different examples.
And as for that meme that you say, it really winds me up because I can give examples of so many people who stood up and died fighting to prevent the takeover of their land by foreigners, basically, because the Frank, you know, I say these missions are not done by natives.
And they're trying to impose a foreign way of life on the people who resisted and were murdered.
And that, you know, that's not, that's a, that's a tradition.
That's how tradition is resisting.
And in Lithuania, in 1336, which is, you know, what many consider like the high middle ages, like the height of Christianity.
Well, what did the, you know, this is when it's most attractive to become a Christian, surely, if you're not a Christian.
Well, the Lithuanians didn't want to be.
They weren't interested in it.
The Teutonic Order of German knights went there and fought, you know, to try and force them with the Northern Crusades to become Christian.
And in 1336, over 4,000 Lithuanians voluntarily commit suicide at the Pilenye Fort.
I don't know how to pronounce it properly, Pilenai Fort, rather than become Christian.
So 4,000 people would rather die than become Christian.
Does that sound like that was like a great tradition of conversion?
That does sound like that sounds horrible to me.
It sounds like they shouldn't have invaded another person's country and tried to impose a foreign religion on them when they didn't want it.
And then all these people dying.
That doesn't sound like a good thing to me.
But yeah, obviously they're selective about their history or they don't really know it.
It's amazing how many people will say to me, oh, you don't know your history.
Like, literally, I studied the one thing I actually studied definitely, I know, is the conversion period of Northern Europe.
And then I say, what do you know about it?
What have you read?
They don't have read a single text on the matter, like primary text or secondary.
They don't know what they're talking about.
But because they, you know, what's real is what's what makes them feel consoled.
And they have to have a consoling narrative of history that makes them believe that everything they're doing is right.
And it's the same with like wokes, you know, people like that.
They don't, they haven't got the ability to think that they are, they made a mistake because they've done everything they've done.
They believe everything they believe because they want to be, they want to take the easy option to be what they consider to be a good person.
And they've done that by, you know, the quick way of doing it is just referring to popular opinion and, you know, alleged experts and what you can like easily see is a truth in a society.
So that makes people say, oh, you know, all people are born exactly equal or something like that without ever checking it.
But then when confronted with evidence that shows you can't possibly make that argument, it's certainly not true.
And what's being attacked then is not a fact they previously believed to be true and they're now being challenged.
It's the core of their value system.
And so they don't become reflective or considerate of evidence.
They just revert to an emotional outburst and start behaving awfully and attacking in dishonest ways and things like that.
It's the same exact behavior I've seen by some, some, not all Christians, but some, particularly online Christian converts, people who convert to a different denomination than the one they were raised in, or especially like that.
And also to woke people like left-wing Marxist people are like that too.
I recall hearing something about a last Viking king.
Did he convert to Christianity?
Do you know that first?
I'm not sure which one you're referring to.
There are, I mean, there are many different kings who converted.
The Danes were the first northern Germanic people to convert to Christianity.
And the last continental Germanic people, but the first North Germanic people.
And then the Swedes, I think there were hundreds, is that 400 years between the initial conversion of the Danes and the final conversion of the Swedes.
So it's not like Christianity arrives and everyone's like, this is the best thing ever.
Let's all convert.
That's 400 years.
That's more history than America has under his belt.
King Harold, Sigurdsson, the last great Viking king.
So he lost, basically, or did he convert?
I don't know.
If you're not familiar with that one, it's fine.
I wanted to ask you about.
I can tell you why he's called the last Viking king.
First off, there's no such thing as a Viking age.
That's just something historians we use now in the present day to refer to it.
No one knew there was a Viking age, certainly not the Vikings, because they had been raiding for hundreds of years before the Viking Age.
The tradition of raiding other people is just prehistoric.
It's ancient.
And not only did Germanic people do it, but all people did it, like in Europe.
Like Rome starts with Vikings.
Romulus and Remus were like Vikings.
They came and raided and then they got it.
The Irish have stuff like that too.
But we call 1066 in England.
We say that's the end of the Viking era because we didn't have any more Viking invasions after then.
But that isn't really, other countries don't, they define it differently in Scandinavia, for example.
And because we defeated the Vikings at Stamford Bridge, then we can say he's the last Viking or whatever, because Harold Haldrada was leading the Vikings in that battle in 1066 and lost to the English.
And then we had to march south after that and then fight the Normans and we lost there.
And that's why the Normans took over.
So yeah, I don't think it's true.
What is your religious beliefs?
Like, in what way are you a pagan?
Like, do you believe the gods, all the Norse gods, really existed on earth?
Are they metaphors?
Are they symbolic?
Can you explain where you're coming from with that?
Yes.
I think the problem people have here, especially if they've been raised in a materialist tradition or like pseudo-materialist, like Christianity is.
So Christianity is unlike other religions beforehand because all religions have gods.
They refer to the gods or sometimes they don't even have gods.
They have like spirits or something.
And they exist in another world that is not tangible or visible, but sometimes manifests in phenomena that they notice in this world.
Or that this world itself is somehow a reflection of this unseen world.
That's generally like a catch-all for all traditions around the world and trying to explain.
It's a bit ham-fisted, but that's to try and do it.
Christianity is radical because it places the divine in a human body in an historical moment.
This year, this man was born, and he is God, the only God, and all gods are either not, don't exist or they're devils, and this is it, and then you count forwards from there all history.
The problem is that if you're a Christian and you're trying to understand other religions, and you're trying, they would think that I'm thinking of like, you know, Jesus had to go to the toilet, wipe himself, they had to do things like a human, like, and then so they're used to thinking of gods as having a corporeal form.
Now, that's not how we think at all.
We do believe that Odin can appear as a human, and then we call him Grim, Grim or guest.
He comes in the form of a person, and then when he comes in the form of a person, he looks like a very old man usually.
But that's only to test us and trick us.
And also, the Greeks had that idea too: Zeus or Jupiter, whatever, would come down in the form of a human sometimes.
But they didn't necessarily look like a human you don't know.
Like, it could look like your friend or your dad or your mum could, like, Athena could come in the form of your mum and talk to you and then should say something.
And then afterwards, you realize that wasn't my mum, that was Athena.
But all the rest of the time, do they have a physical form?
No, they're not incorporeal.
They exist in an eternal metaphysical reality that is completely intangible and lacks all contingencies.
It is not tempered by a world of contingency like we inhabit.
You can't see it, you can't experience it except through the inferior reality, which is a manifestation of the superior reality of the divine, of the gods.
So, do I believe that exists?
Of course, because everything is only a manifestation of the gods.
There is nothing without the gods.
This world is all the gods, but only but not the gods.
The gods are not merely the physical world that we inhabit.
Rather, this physical world we inhabit is an inferior and tiny component of a much larger metaphysical reality that you can't perceive with a mere mortal mind.
So, when we're talking about the gods, we're not talking about a bunch of dudes on a cloud with like that you can like touch and feel, or we, if we get a long enough binocular telescope, we can find them on that cloud or something ridiculous like that.
And I think that's the problem for like comic books and stuff like that: that people don't understand how gods are perceived.
It's funny because you can go to Japan or India and you can meet actual polytheists and talk to them about what they actually believe.
The Norse or like Germanic paganism is not different from that.
If you went up to them and say, like, where does Shiva live?
What's his address?
Can I go and meet him?
They'd be like, What are you talking about?
That's not how it works at all.
So, yes, I believe in them.
That is my religion, if you use the modern conceptions of religion.
But it's not a about, it's not about physical beings.
And the myths are, as Emperor Julian explained, the myths are ways of understanding the gods.
So, they don't always pertain to events that occurred in this material reality.
But they are all true because they all pertain to the truths that govern the entire existence that we experience.
So, they're more like archetypes.
Would you describe them like archetypes?
That is the Jungian terminology that Carl Jung, the psychologist, uses.
And it has been very popular among heathens, especially the original Vanguard who helped to revive heathenry in a big way in the 1980s in Britain and America.
They were all very influenced by Jungian notions of archetypes.
Is that Asatru?
Asatru?
Is that who you're referring to?
That group?
Yeah, so Stephen McNallon is a big, big, big, big man in that respect.
You could get him on and ask him to explain his own views on that.
Are you similar to them or are you related to them?
Have you ever gone to one of their churches?
Temples?
Hoff.
Hof, secret.
Hoff.
I've never been to one of their Hofs, but I'm friendly with them.
And I'm indebted to the Vanguard of the 1980s, such as Stephen McNallon, for preserving the flame and passing it on to my generation.
And we will pass it on again, I hope.
So, you know, I'm a millennial and I've successfully made Zoomers become heathen.
And they, I hope, will continue to do it and do it as you go.
But yes, Stephen McNallon is extremely important in that respect.
And I respect their use of Carl Gustav Jung because in 2010, I was a big reader of Jung as well and about archetypes.
And it helped me integrate slightly atheistic.
And it helped me integrate a materialist mindset with a religious one.
But now I don't really use that anymore.
And I'm hesitant to use this term archetype to refer to the gods because it indicates that they're it can indicate, but doesn't necessarily indicate that they are merely a sort of like literary device for explaining a type of person.
Whereas what they are is a divine personality.
And if there are people who resemble that personality, that's because they are a generation of it from the prior divine personality.
So yeah, I mean, they have archetypical qualities because they precede the humans who follow those archetypes.
But I don't like the idea that they are of using a Jungian framework that would exclude the reality of the divine personalities.
Okay.
What is your book?
What do you plan your book is going to be on the topic?
Woke History Pushback00:02:47
I think it'd be cool to have like a kid's coloring book that has some of the Viking legends and stories to kind of teach them lessons and morals and stuff.
I'm sure there are some out there like that, but that would be something.
I've got young daughters, so reading them some Viking stories would be cool.
Yeah, well, I work with this really cool artist called Christian Sloan Hall, and his works in most of my videos probably.
And he and I have been talking for a long time about doing a book like that about like a children's book about like condensing the myths in a much more like digestible way for a bedtime story.
I've got two kids now and I'm used now to reading them the myths.
And I notice what isn't translatable to a bedtime story format.
Some of it is not.
And I'd have to think carefully about how to do that.
His art would help a lot.
But they really love the gods and they love to talk about the gods and to pray to the gods.
But yeah, this book's not going to be that.
This book is going to be a it's going to be called Woking the Dead and it's going to be about woke people trying to tell us our ancestors were all black and gay.
Okay.
Oh, that's a good topic too for a book.
That is a big problem.
They're always trying to do that.
It killed me how on the Netflix show they made the Viking queen a black woman.
It's so rubbing it in our faces.
It's so disrespectful.
Yeah, I mean, it's really, it's been going on for too long now.
There's pushback.
There's huge pushback in the general public, but that that and some people think that that means the battle's won, but they're absolutely wrong because academia is so different from like normal world.
The way like a lot of academics are extremely left wing and they're and those who aren't are dependent on the their jobs depend upon them hiding their real beliefs.
Some people think, oh, you know, if if academics disagree with this, then they would say so.
No, they will lose their jobs.
Like some of the, I get emailed by academics who help me with research and stuff.
They will not put their names publicly on the stuff that they're doing.
So they ask me to say it instead.
Like they can't do it because of the climate of academia is awful.
I mean, even in 2011, when I was doing my degree, my master's, and I remember someone shoving like a Marxist leaflet in my face.
It's like, get it up my face.
I'm not a communist.
And then they're like, what do you mean?
Like, following me and trying, why aren't you a Marxist?
No, Like, they're completely insane people.
And they're allowed to do it.
Like, there's no pushback on them, hardly any.
Like, cancel culture is still here.
We're not at peak woke like in 2020, but it's still, we're drowning in woke still.
We need to, we need to push back a lot more.
Wooden Idol Myths00:05:00
Do you think evolution is true?
Yeah.
Yeah, I do.
What about like abiogenesis versus creationism?
I'm just not familiar with abiogenesis.
Like life starting from non-life naturally.
Ah, like Ernst Haeckel's theory of mind.
Yeah.
Like where did we come from?
Yeah.
I find it really interesting, the idea, like that existence itself is lended towards complexity.
And that like, you know, like the molecular level, like innate structures want to be more complicated.
And that tendency towards complexity leads in turn to life.
But I don't believe in it.
I don't think it's quite right.
I do believe that life is an inevitable part of being and that the gods that made the universe wanted life to exist within it and that whatever process generated life within the universe was hard written into the code.
You know what I mean?
I think that like I don't think that the myths say that Odin like created man out of wood, man and woman out of wood.
And to me, that story, like there are some people I don't agree with, that they call themselves like mythic literalists.
And they'll say, if the myth says Odin got a bit of wood and made the first man, and that then that's exactly what happened.
But I don't think that is what actually even our ancestors thought.
I think that what it's that myth is trying to explain is that Odin, when we make an idol of wood of Odin, we are reflecting his creation of us.
And we're participating in a reciprocal creation process.
We have this urge to create and to pray.
Odin through the first, he made the world through a sacrifice and we are supposed to sacrifice to him.
He made us by making a wooden idol and we worship him by making a wooden idol of him.
And I believe he made mankind, but I don't think he literally took a piece of wood and carved the first man.
I think this is a way for a pre-modern person to understand the process by which mankind was created and to understand that their worship of the gods is a way of honoring the gods who made us.
I actually think that the narrative of evolution that science presents is mostly correct and that the role of the divine in that process precedes the process.
So like Odin knows everything that's going to happen already, or like his wife knows everything that's going to happen at least.
And he can learn the future from talking to witches in hell anyway, as he does in several myths.
So between his wife and these witches.
He knows everything that's ever going to happen long before it happens.
And obviously, therefore, when he made mankind, he knew how, like, he made life.
He made the world.
So he made all these processes that would eventually lead to now.
And we believe as heathens that everything that happens was preordained by fate or wirt.
We called it something weird.
Some people say it.
Urt in Old Norse.
And this idea of fate is that everything that happens and ever will happen has already been determined long ago.
So that means, from my perspective, the evolution of apes into men is something that was planned before the first amoeba.
It was always going to be there.
It was always going to happen.
There was never going to be any other end result when that first amoeba was alive.
Fate of the gods.
Do you have a best book you could suggest to people about Norse paganism lore and stories?
People want to learn some of the best stories.
Is there a book you could suggest?
Best stories.
Well, the stories are all in the original primary texts, which are mostly just the poetic edda, which is, or sometimes called the Elder Edda, which is the original Icelandic compilation of pagan era poems of authentic pagan origin.
That is an essential thing that all heathens have to read that.
Then there's a supplement to it, which is a separate book called The Prose Edda, written by a Christian called Snoris Thurluson, where he explains the myths in a prose story format.
And that is obviously not written in pagan times or by a pagan, but the myths within are attested in earlier iconography, like artwork.
So we know that they are genuine pagan myths and also sometimes in the poems from the pagan times.
Vinland Saga Analysis00:04:33
So we know that they aren't just all invention, although there are bits in them that are dubious and pretty obvious, like where you can tell when he's inserting Christian morality in.
The prologue, the introduction to it, is complete bullshit.
Do not take that bit seriously.
No one does.
We know that the prologue is just him like writing an excuse for why he as a Christian is writing down all these pagan myths.
So he's just saying Odin isn't a god.
He was just a Turkish dude or he was a Trojan who came long ago, blah, blah, blah.
It's all rubbish.
But yeah, the rest of it, very good.
The prose edda for read that.
Those two books are basically where all the Germanic myths come from.
Although we have other stuff like Beowulf, which is definitely worth a read.
Great as well, even though it's been Christianized too.
And, you know, some other folk stories.
But if you want books helping you understand them, that's another matter because, I mean, reading the primary sources is a bit heavy for some people.
So you might prefer to read like interpretations of them.
All of them come with caveats because like, you know, they're all written by academics and we all have different beliefs and stuff.
But Hilda Ellis Davidson is, she has been like the main one that everyone loves.
Like Stephen McNallen loves her.
She wrote a lot in the 70s.
Now, a lot of stuff's changed since then.
She's not in vogue in academia anymore.
But I do think if you pick up, you know, her myths of the north, that's a good book.
You can get it cheaply on the internet.
And it does give you mostly accurate interpretations.
More contemporary, there's people like Neil Price, very popular, head of archaeology at Uppsala University.
He's an Englishman.
I've met him.
He was the advisor for the Northman film.
However, I disagree with some of his theories too.
But, you know, he is a very, he's an expert, an archaeologist, not a historian, but he's an expert and he knows what he's talking about for the most part.
So even though I don't agree with some of the things he says, I would still say you can't go too far wrong by reading him.
I saw you did a review of the Northman movie, which I liked.
I thought it was cool.
Did you think it was good?
Were you happy with it?
I loved it.
Yeah, it's a great film.
I talk about in the film that, like, some of Neil Price's ideas that I disagree with made their way into the film.
And I talk about why they're wrong and why I don't think they should be in the film.
But the Northman one there is just at the bottom there.
It's that my video there is like almost as long as the film, but everyone who watches it says they enjoyed the film a lot better after they watched my video.
Because one problem with the film that didn't affect me is that it drops you into that world where you're expected to know a whole load of different references to their behavior and stuff.
And the entire film is really well researched and it really puts you into the mindset of the Northman.
So this video tries to explain to you what you need to understand about Germanic paganism to understand why the character Amlef does the things he does and what the things happening mean, what the different characters are actually doing in terms of the magical beliefs of the time that explains their behavior.
So yeah, I thought it was a great film.
I went to see I will watch your video explaining it and then re-watch it again.
I plan on doing that.
Did you ever see that Netflix show about Norse paganism?
It was like an anime cartoon.
Did you see any of that?
Or did you see the clip at the very end of it?
Vinland Saga.
I can't remember the title of it exactly.
I saw an anime.
I saw the first season of Vinland Saga.
I don't know if that was Netflix or not.
Vinland Saga was about Knut and he's a little like Twink boy, Viking King, King Knut the Great, who ruled Denmark and England and Norway.
And he's this like little twink in anime.
In anime, everyone's got the lead character has to be like that, right?
But yeah, I thought it was quite fun.
I mean, it's not, it's more accurate than History Channel's Vikings, that's for sure.
But it is just a cartoon after all.
Twilight of the Gods by Zack Snyder.
That was it that I was referring to.
No, I don't know this.
Oh my gosh, look at how this ends.
It has Odin bowing down to Jesus in the last scene.
Look at this.
Hold on.
I'll share.
You don't need the audio.
So there's Odin.
And then he goes, What's happening?
Anime Finale Climax00:04:22
No, it's Jesus on the cross conquering paganism.
This is the season finale.
This is the climax.
There goes all the trinkets and stuff, all the pagan idols.
Yeah, it looks cheap.
It looks cheap and not very interesting.
The Viking Age sailing away and turns into the church.
How can the God who made the world and mankind bow down to a Jewish dude?
And also, since he already knew everything that's going to happen, he already knew that was going to happen before he made the world anyway.
It doesn't make any sense.
Yeah.
And then you say, oh, Odin didn't know that.
So you're not talking about Odin, then you're just talking about some made-up straw man.
That is Odin.
Odin is the one greatest god of all, the highest god.
That's what he's called, high one, the highest.
So it doesn't make any sense.
But yeah, who made this, I wonder?
Who could be behind this?
Who owns Netflix?
Why would they do that?
I wonder.
Nothing they hate more than they're rubbing Jesus in pagans' faces.
How about Aura Linda book?
I see some comments in that in the live chat.
I've heard that's bunk.
It's fake.
It's fake.
Have you done videos on Aryan stuff too?
Like, I've heard that Aryan mythology is mostly myth, also.
I don't know.
The Aryans are a group of European people who left Europe in the Bronze Age and inhabited Central Asia.
And from Central Asia, 4,000 years ago, they invented the chariot and they then made a new type of horse.
It was better than the Proto-Indo-European horses.
And then all other horses in the world were replaced by this horse because it was so much better.
And that's the horses that all modern horses come from.
And then around three and a half thousand years ago, they invaded India and Iran.
And the ones that stayed on the steppe became the Scufians.
And the ones that went to India became the high caste Indians.
And the ones that went to Iran become the rulers of Iran.
I did a video in 2018, or no, 2019 called Aryan Invasion, Myth or Reality.
And I explained in that video everything still holds up really well, even though loads of new studies have come out since 2019 on this.
Just reinforce what I say.
But basically, yes, the Aryan invasion happened.
Yes, they were people of European origin.
Yes, some of them did have blonde hair, actually.
And yes, Hinduism and the Sanskrit language derived from Bronze Age Europeans religion.
Is that what you were referring to?
Well, yeah, I know there's some truth to it, but like there's also a mythological aspect.
Like I have like a huge ancient empire or something like that.
I don't know.
I mean, there's definitely loads of rubbish about Aryans that comes out.
Some of it comes from old theosophical beliefs from the 19th century.
Some of it's Nazi esotericism.
Some of it's just schizo people in the modern age.
In Russia, there's a form of made-up paganism called the Slavic Vedas.
And that refers the Vedas are the texts written in India.
The Rig Veda is the Aryan text written like three and a half thousand years ago when the Aryans got there.
It wasn't written.
It was because they didn't write.
They used to just sing everything, but then it was written down later.
And it's a core text in the Hindu religion.
And anyway, someone just made up a version of it for Slavs called the Slavic Vedas.
And it's completely, it's like Laura Linda.
It's just made up.
But like in Russia, some people really believe in it.
And yeah, it's just, I've never read it.
But the funny thing is that it's not, you'd think from the name that it was like some kind of Nazi thing, but it's actually more like New Age left-wing kind of feminist sort of thing, I think.
I've not read it, but yeah, it's bunk.
Do you think that we really went to the moon?
I don't know about that sort of thing.
I mean, I know that there's some doubt about it, but I'm not in a position where I can speak with any authority on the subject.
I would say it is equally possible that we went there as it is that the American government would make it all up.
Blonde Hair Selection00:05:32
Well, within the realms of possibility.
You know, they're going back tomorrow.
They're going to go fly around the moon tomorrow.
No, I didn't know.
I had no idea.
Yeah.
Artemis 2.
They're flying around the moon and coming back.
They're not going to walk on it.
No, they're just flying around it.
This is like a test mission.
The next time they go, they're going to land.
Cool, I guess.
Yeah.
Anyway, that's happening tomorrow.
I wanted to ask.
It's been on my mind a little bit.
I was just going to get you.
I also liked your videos.
We're going to wrap up here in a second and play a couple of the super chats that came in.
I know you got to run, but your videos about where is it?
Blue eyes.
You have a blue eye video and a blonde hair video.
And I think you're totally on point with the blue eyes being for hunting more at night in the twilight.
My eyes are so sensitive to the sun.
I can't go outside for two minutes without sunglasses.
But in the snow is even way worse.
I can't even open my eyes on a sunny day with snow.
I should point out that the blue eye video is very popular, but it's not a very serious video.
It's just based on a preprint that I don't think, I'm not even sure that preprint's got like a peer-reviewed yet, which suggests this might be why blue eyes had an advantage, this low-light thing.
I don't know.
But the blonde hair one, that was more my theory, my own personal theory, which I tried to connect it to neotony.
And I and I apparently, I mean, I'm not a geneticist, but geneticists have formed me that I was onto something, and I might be right.
What was the theory?
I didn't want, I saw the video, but I didn't watch it yet.
What was the theory for blonde hair?
Well, because there can't possibly be any environmental advantage to having blonde hair, it's not like you know, you're less likely to die if you've got blonde hair.
It's not going to happen.
What if it reflects heat?
Instead of dark hair absorbing the sun and the heat, blonde hair reflects it, but there's less sun in the north, so that doesn't make sense.
That wouldn't work either.
It doesn't make sense.
No, I think what it is, is an accidental, initially an accidental, like it started as a neotonous trait, and that means it's something associated with children.
So neotonous traits get bred into people sometimes.
Where like, for example, dogs have neotenous traits because when we had the wolves, we were trying to make them more tame.
And that just basically were just breeding them on initially to not rip our throats out.
And in the process, like, oh, this one didn't rip anyone's throat out.
Let's breed it with this one that didn't rip anyone's throat out.
And just repeating that.
And eventually, you start to have the wolf, the wolves start to look more like puppies.
Their ears are floppy, like a puppy.
They never stick up.
And that's why dogs have floppy ears.
That's a neotinous trait.
So we've bred them to keep childlike traits.
Similarly, women have been getting more beautiful over time.
If you went back to Stone Age, you wouldn't find as many hotties.
There would be a lot of women, you'd find them quite ugly because we've been breeding them for neotenous traits, such as bigger eyes because it looks cuter.
We like women to look young because sexually, like youth is a symbol for fertility.
It's like a quick, like an old hag, you're not attracted to an old hag.
Why is that?
It's not because, as feminists say, we've been conditioned.
You're biologically less sexually aroused by an old hag because being old is a sign that you're less fertile and less likely to be a good breeding partner.
So as a result, we've started to like breed neotinous traits over time into women, but not less so into men because it's not so attractive for women to see neotinous traits.
However, I think that one neotenous trait that we know the Indo-Europeans really bred for is lactase persistence, the ability to digest milk into adulthood.
So all mammals can digest milk when they're born.
They're sucking at their mother's tit.
But as they grow old, they stop being able to digest it.
But this lactase persistence is just the gene for like the childhood gene for drinking milk or digesting milk just stays and you can keep doing it as an adult.
And it was with the Indo-Europeans like 5,000 years ago that it started to be more common.
And then gradually over the Bronze Age, more and more common up to the Iron Age in Europe, it reached 50% of Europeans already.
Half of Europeans could drink milk in adulthood.
And now it's even higher.
Like three-quarters of us or more.
So, um, that's a neotenous trait.
And I believe that when Europeans didn't have so much blonde hair, it was mostly just children who had blonde hair.
And that when they bred the trait for lactase persistence, somehow this was connected to genes for blonde hair.
And as a result, blondeism increased over the Bronze Age and in the Iron Age.
And that's been that's true because it's vindicated now on phenotype studies that blonde hair has been increasingly more common over the course of the Bronze and Iron Age.
So, yeah, I think it's an accidental thing.
And initially, they weren't breeding for blonde hair, like, but then maybe as a side effect, when blonde hair started to become more common, people were like, actually, that's sexy or that's sexually desirable.
I want a blonde, I want a blonde partner, I want a blonde wife, or a blonde husband, or whatever.
And then, and then it, you know, it then has a sexual selection as well as a natural selection.
Because, of course, adults who were able to drink milk survived more because they have more calories, they're less likely to starve.
So, there's the natural selection thing there as well.
Indigenous Language Debate00:07:20
So, that's a theory in a nutshell.
I never heard of that one.
That's interesting.
I like evolution, so understanding why things are the way they are evolutionarily.
Like, it could be related to children and drinking milk later on and being lactose-tolerant.
Interesting.
Why did black blonde hair evolve?
I'll have to look into that a little bit more.
I saw you had last question, and then we'll hit a couple super chats.
Um, you have a debunk on this stupid, kooky Christian theory that Europeans are really the lost tribes of Israel, right?
Or they'll say your face of disgust there, right?
Don't you have a video on that debunking that video because it's like, what am I debunking?
Like, you gotta, you've got to have like a fat, you've got to have like an argument to debunk.
Like, there's nothing there, like, yeah, we've got no, we don't speak Semitic languages, we don't have DNA from them.
There's no genetic argument, there's no linguistic argument, there's no archaeological argument, there's no historic argument.
It's literally just some like Christ Christian saying, Trust me, bro, uh, Japan, like, uh, or some bullshit like that.
It's like, that's not, I mean, if someone believes in that, it's not because they've been convinced by argument, it's because they want to believe it.
So, there's not really much point arguing against it because you're not arguing with someone who's rationally considering what is true, they just want to believe that.
Let them believe it.
Retarded.
Well, no, I don't think we should let them believe it.
I think they should be shamed and mocked and shunned, actually.
Yeah, definitely.
Because it's so stupid.
And it's anti-white saying, like, we're awful, we're worshiping demons, but oh, we want to be the Hebrews so bad.
They become wannabe Jews.
We were Hebrews.
Yeah, it's quite pathetic.
I mean, oh, hold on.
Here we go.
Thank you, Anne-Marie.
She just asked me to have you on, and I'm like, tomorrow, we got it booked.
I wanted to have you on for a long time, too.
I just, I'm bad at getting guests.
I'm sorry.
$20 been waiting for this stream for years.
Hail the Gorshiak.
Hail Roussel.
Hail the old gods.
Hail the old gods down with Yahweh.
That's the that's the mantra.
Torkoal sent $20 been for this stream for years.
Hail the Gorshiak.
We saw that one.
Is that good?
Oh, my gosh.
I hope you sent in all those extra ones.
Oh, my gosh.
Torkoal, did you send me hundreds of dollars?
Wow, generous.
No, I think he messed up.
They do this sometimes.
Oh, my gosh, Torkoal.
Yo, Jim Bo117 sent $10 on Rumble.
Thanks for the work you both do.
You're welcome.
Thank you.
I appreciate Tom's work too.
I was really enjoying his videos.
Always remember, we live in an outlier period, Lulla and Christian power.
They're only tolerant right now because they're weak at the moment.
Never underestimate the threat Christian nationalism poses.
Oh, I don't.
I know how vicious and psychotic they can be.
Zionist Viking.
Meanwhile, Scandinavian Vikings were a bunch of and started wearing crosses at a whim.
Sounds anti-Scandinavian.
Lotta sent $5 hi, Tom.
Your work is fantastic.
Adams, too.
I am not an academic, so can you help me understand the push online to convince people of European descent that they come from Arabs and not the other way around?
I've never heard that.
I've not heard that either.
And I don't think that Arabs come from Europeans either.
I don't think either is accurate.
There's quite distinctions in England.
Hold on, we'll get indigenous.
I'm not able to pause these, so once they all come through and I turn it on, we can go back to that question.
We're talking about $20 on Rumble.
Arnon Milchin, billionaire Israeli spook, is accredited producer of a Northman.
What do you both make of that?
I didn't know that.
Babatu sent $50 on Rumble.
Thank you.
Babatu does not bow before Jewish gods or the Jew.
Babatu pays homage to my ancestral gods.
Great, inspiring interview for me.
Babatu has been to the Odin Shaf and passed the horn with Steve M. Nice.
Nice.
I interviewed their leader now.
I love you, lads.
No.
Has Tom Fact checked the forbidden history of the Aryan race book by the Church of Aryanity?
You heard of that?
I don't know what that is.
Hive Tyran36 sent $5 on Rumble.
Tom, you are based I'm going to follow now.
Cheers.
Yeah, survive the jive, guys.
Follow him.
On the question was about Arabs and the question about English language.
I remember the Arabs thing.
I've never heard anyone say Europeans come from Arabs.
We have a Near Eastern component which is from Anatolia.
It's not Arabic.
It's 8,000 years ago.
Some people in Western Anatolia moved to Europe and introduced farming.
Their closest relatives in the whole world today are Sardinians and also Spanish people quite close.
Arabs aren't anywhere close to them.
I don't know what Arabs know.
I don't know why you think Arabs come from Europeans because they don't.
Usually what I hear is a lot of people seethe about out of Africa.
That's the thing that they hate.
They go, we didn't come from blacks.
Like, that's kind of the sentiment I see.
Yeah, I mean, I can understand why they would feel that way, but I think the assumption here is that, like, the black people as we know them today are this like permanent fixed racial group, and whites are a novel introduction.
But that's not actually what is being suggested.
A group of early hominids left Africa 100,000 years ago, and non-Africans descend from that group.
But they are not modern, like West Africans.
The closest living people to them today would be the Khoisan in South Africa, but they are also extremely divergent from them.
So it's not really to say, like I wouldn't really like, it doesn't really help you understand anything by comparing them to modern black people because they weren't related to modern black people.
They might have looked like modern black people, but they weren't related to them, really.
Anyway, and it's so long ago.
You're talking about 100,000 years ago.
And also, we have lot our genes have changed so much, and it's not really relevant.
It's not that important to me.
I mean, it's interesting, but it's not important.
The question about English language being indigenous is a bit like a chicken and egg thing.
Like, indigenous means it comes from the land.
Now, all languages are equally old, actually, because each language comes from an earlier language.
Like, in modern English comes from Middle English, Middle English from Old English, Old English from West Germanic, West Germanic from Proto-Germanic.
But there is never a time when people are like, oh, we're going to switch from Middle English to modern English.
Starting Heathenry Guide00:07:21
Nobody knew that, nobody knew that the language changed.
We just used that stage arbitrarily to cut it.
Now, the English language, as you're probably referring to it, didn't exist anywhere outside Britain.
It was initially spoken in England.
Unless you count Proto-Germanic as English, but that doesn't make sense because Proto-Germanic is ancestral to Norwegian and German as well.
So in that sense, it's a language from Britain.
So of course it's indigenous to Britain.
But it has its root.
Does it have roots outside of British Isles?
Yes.
But every single language in Britain has roots outside the British Isles, including all the Celtic languages.
So it doesn't make any sense to use a criteria that would say it wasn't indigenous.
Only like a very anti-English Celtic nationalist might try attempt such dishonest argumentation, but it would doesn't make sense to do that.
Okay, last super chat from Vilvision.
Last question.
And everybody make sure to go subscribe over to Survive the Jive and your other channel too.
You can find all the links there.
And on Twitter, we've been following each other on Twitter for a bit as well.
Everybody get over there also.
If you're not, I'm sure many of you are.
My course, starting Heathenry, is for people if you want to learn how to be a heathen.
Real Vision sent $10 on Rumble.
Some of us who are mixed European, i.e., Irish, German, and Scandinavian, choose to go upstream to Aryanism, mixing Vedic with Watanism.
Is there a critique against doing so from Tom's mind?
This is something.
Church of Aryanity claims whites are the only population that come from Cro-Mag non-man.
Therefore, we are in fact our own species.
Thoughts on that?
That's rubbish.
Oh, my gosh.
Sorry to send five dollars blacks online claim they ceded all of humanity.
Yeah, that's that's not true.
Vote.
Dude, I paused it and they just keep coming.
Radbite of Frisia was a pagan king who fought Christians.
When he tried to baptize him, he said he preferred spending eternity in with his pagan ancestors than in heaven with a pack of bears.
Very true.
Yeah, I like that story.
Okay, now the initial question.
Can you remind me what it was?
I forgot.
Yes, yes, yes.
I know.
I'm sorry.
I wish Power Chat had a way to pause those.
It always just goes to the next one.
Okay, Real Vision said, Some of us who are mixed European, Irish, German, Scandinavian choose to go upstream to Aryanism, mixing with Vedic and Wotenism.
Is there a critique against doing so?
Right.
Well, the problem, it's a good idea, and I've done something similar.
I've been criticized by some people for being influenced by Indian religion as well.
And my justification, people misunderstand my justification.
It's not because Hinduism and European paganism have a common root in Indo-European religion 5,000 years ago, because actually they've both changed a lot in thousands of years.
The reason why I found Hinduism useful is because you can see an extent tradition in the world today of polytheists worshiping gods, and you can just see how they do it and what it's like.
Now, that to me is useful, but the problem is when people start to integrate Vedanta and Indian philosophies into it, those things were all invented in India in the last, like a lot of like Indian philosophy is only like 2,000 or 2,500 years old.
So over a thousand years after the Aryan invasion and has no relationship to European paganism.
That's not to say it's wrong, but it's certainly not like something you can use to get in touch with your ancestors.
But I think like, I definitely think it's helpful to look at other polytheists, even if they're in Africa or Japan.
They don't have to be Indo-European.
Like just to see how people who aren't part of a Abrahamic Semitic religion worship gods.
And obviously it doesn't mean you have to do exactly what they do, but it helps you to understand it.
Some people think, I don't need to listen to these foreigners.
I can do it all my own way.
But if you've only been introduced to religion through Christianity, then what reference points do you have to understand what religion is?
You don't have anything.
And then those people who are so confident that they don't need anything end up just making paganism into Protestant religion and saying stuff, they sound like Martin Luther more than any pagans.
And a lot of these people, we call them plagiarisms where they just want to basically act like Protestants and pretend that they know everything.
But yes, I don't have a problem with you if you want to like mix, like learn from Indian religion, but I do think you've got to be cautious that you don't like contaminate the native tradition with Indian philosophy, which may in some cases be heretical or like contradictory to the established traditions of European paganism, especially things like, you know, blood, sacrifice.
Like European paganism definitely allows for eating meat and offering meat to the gods.
Hinduism doesn't.
If you start to try and integrate like Buddhist and Hindu ideas of like not hurting animals, then you're just not, you're not doing the same thing your ancestors did anymore.
You're doing something Indian.
So that's just an example.
But yeah, I can't go into the details because there's too much to go on.
But yeah, there's a big debate within paganism about people who think that this should or shouldn't be allowed.
All right.
Tom, thank you so much for your time and your work.
We got to do another show sometime in the future and get more into your thoughts on Christianity.
You were raised Christian, I believe, too.
So it'd be interesting to hear that evolution in your religious views.
And any final plugs or anything before we close it?
Thank you very much for having me, Adam.
I'll say again, I have a course, an online course for people who want to learn how to be heathen.
And it's not about teaching you about the myths because I think, as I said already, there's books.
So you can just pick up a book and read the myths.
But some people read the myths and they're like, okay, I know the myths, but how do I actually be a heathen?
What do I actually do?
And there's no good books on that.
And I thought, I'm going to make a course, step-by-step mini videos, like five hours of content in these little videos that you can watch in your phone bit by bit when you need them.
And it explains clearly the things you need to do and when you need to do them, how you do them.
So by the time you finish the course, you will know how to do it.
It's called Starting Heathenry.
It's on, if you Google Starting Heathenry, you'll find it.
Very cool.
Thank you, Tom.
Thank you, everybody, for watching and donating.
Let me know what you think in the comments.
Like, share, subscribe, clip it.
You know what to do.
Tom, I'll be in touch with you.
Keep up the good work.
And I will see everybody tomorrow.
We're going to watch the moon launch tomorrow live.
It's going to be awesome.
We're not going to degrade the greatest accomplishments of Western kind.
Anyway, thank you, Tom, and I will see you guys tomorrow.