Diffusionistic Fantasies IV

Bearded Strangers, Bearded Indians

One of the most boring traditions in alternative archaeology is the “White Gods” mythos. The whole returning white God nonsense which is almost entirely a post European discovery of Americas concoction.1 Part of this mythos is the bearded myth. The idea that since Indians can not grow beards than any story about a bearded individual, and any picture, sculpture of a bearded man must be ipso facto a picture of a non-Indian.

Thus writer after writer have used Indian stories and legends about bearded individuals as evidence of contact with peoples from the old world that pre dates Columbus and of course all depictions of bearded individuals are of non-Indians. Thor Heyerdahl was only the most prominent of the users of the bearded non-Indian story proving contact.2

Thus we get the story of the white Quetzalcoatl, with a beard. I'm also aware that it is a post conquest concoction. As time past from the Spanish conquest Quetzalcoatl got whiter and his beard longer.3

It is another myth that all Indian men can't grow beards. Cortes describes Montezuma has having thin, neat beard for example.4 In fact Diaz gives the following description of Montezuma:

The great Montezuma was about 40 years old, of good height, well proportioned, spare and slight, and not very dark, though of the usual Indian complexion. He did not wear his hair long but just over the ears, and he had a short black beard, well-shaped and thin.5

It appears that after all some Indians can grow beards, just like some Indians have straight noses. The people who came over the Bering strait were not a homogeneous bunch but varied in terms of hairiness, skin color and shape of nose etc.6

Why do so many find it so hard to believe that some Indian men without "white" ancestry could grow beards. Some Chinese and Japanese men can grow beards and they are related to the ancestors of modern Indians of the Americas. So there is no need to postulate "white" ancestry to explain portraits of bearded men in pre-Colombian art. But then these writers "know" that Indian men cannot grow beards but if they do it is because of white ancestry and if portraits of Indian men with beards exist before Columbus that only proves that white men were there in large numbers. There is not any possibility in these peoples minds, not even the smallest, that some Indian men without white ancestry could grow beards given that Japanese and Chinese men sometimes can to say nothing of the Ainu of Northern Japan? I stand amazed!7

None of this implies that all male Indians could grow beards. All that is required is that some male Indians, given the natural variation in hairiness could grow beards. The result being that there is no need to explain the depictions of men with beards in the Americas by postulating “white” immigrants. The assumption that if a Indian has a beard it indicates ”white” ancestry is wrong. To repeat beards appear among the Chinese and Japanese, who are definitely related to the indigenous peoples of the Americas. If recent evidence is anything to go by some the earliest people in the Americas were people like the Ainu of Japan the men of whom can most definitely grow beards. (I am thinking of Kennick man) some diffusionistic authors seem to categorically assume that Indians could not grow beards. (No exceptions). That is simply not true.

The depictions used as evidence and interpreted has belonging to "white" people, (could we be more specific!?). Like the allegedly Negroid Olmec heads, the people depicted are probably Native Americans. Like every human group there is variety in hairiness, head shape and skin color. So some natives were probably paler than others for example the Inca nobility tended to stayed out of sun to distinguish them selves from the peasantry so they would be paler.

From Prescott (Conquest of Mexico, Conquest of Peru) to Thor Heyerdahl (Early Man and the Ocean, etc.), Hancock, and on and on, we hear and read endless variations of the "White God" Ancient American myth. According too which the peoples of the Americas had a myth that a white bearded god (Virachocha, Quetzalcoatl, Votan etc.) brought civilization to them. And also that they believed that this "white god" would return.

This belief has become the equivalent of an "urban legend" that no amount of debunking seems to end. Instead like a rubber ball it keeps bouncing back.

Davies in his book Voyagers to the New World rather sarcastically entitles a chapter White Gods with Black Faces, and effectively demolishes this notion.

It seems that the Native Americans did not originally have a myth of "bearded white gods" bringing culture at all and the myth of return may in fact be largely Spanish in origin.

So in fact the original myths provide no such support at all. So why is this "urban legend" continually recycled? Why do its promoters continue to rely on the same outdated, inaccurate sources? I guess a little more knowledge just might blow up their theories.

It seems that these people are speaking in a closed circle and repeating what they hear from each other with no understanding that their theory is flawed, or at least this bit of evidence.

Since East Asians, Chinese and Japanese who live in the area that the natives of the Americas came from sometimes can and do grow beards and also that different people with different degrees of hairiness may have settled the Americas. There is no need to postulate “white immigrants before Columbus. For this more recent settlement, although pre-Columbus, by peoples of the Old World were is the evidence? Depictions of men with beards occur throughout the Americas; beards do exist among modern day Inuit and West Coast Indians in Canada. I could also mention the native Mexican codex's which show men with beards and of course some Mayan statutes. Diffusionists will claim that this only shows immigration in the past. Were is the evidence of such immigration?8

In the end the fantasy of the bearded white traveller is nothing more than a myth and fantasy of Europeans and those of European descent. It appears that the people that the Indians were depicting in their art and talking about in their myths and legends were other Indians.

To close here are some pictures from the famous photographer of Indians Curtis and yes these Indians have facial hair.

1. Reece, Katherine, The Spanish Imposition, In The Hall of Maat Here. Townsend, Camilla, Burying the White Gods, American Historical Review, Vol. 108, no. 3, June 2003, In the Hall of Maat Here.

Davies, Nigel, Voyagers to the New World, William Morrow and Co. Inc., New York, 1979, pp. 125-139. Wauchope, Robert, Lost Tribes and Sunken Continents, University of Chicago press, Chicago, 1962. Gardner, Brant, The Impact of the Spanish on the Record of Native Oral Tradition, 1998a, Ancient Middle America Here. (link to article no longer works. Article not available. I have copy and will send copy to anyone who requests it.).

2. For examples see Heyerdahl, Thor, Early Man and the Ocean, Vintage Books, New york, 1980, pp. 93-126. Irwin, Constance, Fair Gods and Stone Faces, St. Martin’s Press, New York, 1963. Marx, Robert F., & Marx, Jennifer, In Quest of the Great White Gods, Crown Publishing Group, New York, 1992. Hancock, Graham, Fingerprints of the Gods, Three Rivers Press, New York, 1995.

3. Reece, Davies, Gardner, 1998b Quetzalcoatl as a White Man, 1998c The Bearded Quetzalcoatl Ancient Middle America Here. (link to article no longer works. Article not available. I have copy will send copy to anyone who requests it.).

4. Diaz, Bernal, The Conquest of New Spain, Penguin Books, London, 1973, p. 224. Davies, Gardner, 1998c.

5. Ibid, Diaz, p. 224. Here are a few more quotes about Indians with beards:

We have the following quote from a French Traveller:

A group of "wild people" live there, that are named Igniris; they go with their body completely naked and they have beards, which is different from all Indians, who pull out the hair as soon as it comes.

From Caribbean Consulting Here.

From Captain John Smith of Jamestown fame:

[The Powhatans are] generally tall and straight, of a comely proportion, and of a colour browne...Their haire is generally black, but few have any beards.

From First People: The Early Indians of Virgina Here.

From a Catholic Encyclopedia:

Physically the Mixe are of good height and strongly built, not handsome in features, but hardy and active, and notable burden carriers. Many wear beards.

From New Advent Here.

The following is about a tribe of Brazillian Indians:

Despite believing that if they grew beards or had their hair long at the front 'they might be seized and captured by these', some Tupinambá emulated the appearance of their French allies by growing beards. However, they plucked out all other facial and body hair.

From Wargames Foundry Here. (website now defunct).

For the above quotes thank you Doug Weller.

And how about a picture. This is one of a Yanomamo Indian.

6. Davies, pp. 21-48, Macgowan, Kenneth, & Hester, Joseph A., Early Man in the New World, Anchor Books, New York, 1962, pp. 207-232.

7. Davies, Gardner, 1998b, 1998c.Steibing, William H., Ancient Astronauts, Cosmic Collisions and Other Popular Theories About Man’s Past, Prometheus Books, Buffalo NY, 1984, pp. 140-141.

8. Davies, Macgowan, Meltzer, David J., First Peoples in a New World, University of California Press, Berkeley CA, 2009.

Pierre Cloutier

The Beard

One of the most interesting sexual differences between the sexes is the male ability to grow beards. Of course the ability to grow a beard varies from person to person and among some groups of people male facial hair is sparse or nearly nonexistent. But generally most of the world’s men have facial hair and this has given rise to a whole host of attitudes and reactions.

Just why for example most men can grow some sort of beard is a bit of am mystery; after all it certainly is not to keep our faces warm or to shield them from the sun. The most likely explanation is that the trait is linked to sexual selection in some manner.

For example it is possible that in the past women selected as mates men who had the most impressive amount of facial hair linking the beard with some sort of proof virility and ability to be a good mate. Possibly it was linked to making the male look more threatening by making his jaw and chin look larger. There is some evidence that facial hair does in fact make men look more threatening and in control.

Certain studies have for example indicated that beards make men look more authoritative and serious. Certainly from talking to younger men who look babyish; that they have told me they are taken more seriously if they have a beard.1

However Beards have often taken on a negative quality. It is of interest that much of the time the popular media associates beards with letting yourself go, and having difficulties. Further beards are often associated with being unclean and dirty.2

Exactly why this phobia emerged is of interest and why the tidal shifts of beards being in fashion and then not in fashion occur. However the horror against beards in the West has a long history.3

An example of the phobia against beards is the rather absurd example of Joseph Palmer, (1791-1875 C.E.). Now Mr. Palmer was a bit of a celebrity, abolitionist and all round did not take shit from anyone character. Not a great deal is known about his early life. He was a veteran of the war of 1812 and he was a farmer who had a small farm near the town of Fitchburg Massachusetts. Mr. Palmer was married and had a son. And sometime during his life he grew a truly magnificent set of whiskers. When in 1830 he moved to Fichburg he had a truly Patriarchal beard.4

Joseph Palmer’s Tombstone

Why he grew it and when for the first, (and last) time is not known, however what is unpleasantly known is the truly disgusting way in which his neighbours reacted.

Now this time period was one in which virtually the entire male population of the USA, with again virtually no exceptions was clean shaven and like far too many communities Fichburg was very intolerant of anyone who was “different”. The result was that Mr. Palmer was subjected to a rain of abuse that is truly sickening. The whole thing would be funny given the truly stupid reason for the persecution, except for the fact that Mr. Palmer and his wife and son had to endure this abuse for years.

So when in 1830 Mr. Palmer moved to Fitchburg what happened? Well the evidence indicates that Mr. Palmer was an honest and kind man but also a man of unbending principle and that included the right to wear a beard.

Aside from his wife and son being harassed, the windows on his house were repeatedly broken and he himself was publicly ridiculed by his “good” neighbours. A local reverend, George Task attacked him for his beard. Mr. Palmer replied by quoting the passages in Leviticus forbidding men from trimming their beards. Others openly said he should be prosecuted for wearing a beard. On his occasional visits to Boston crowds followed him poking fun at him.

As time went by in 1830 things got worst. Once at communion during a Church service the Pastor ignored him. Deeply wounding the very religious Mr. Palmer. He stopped attending Church. Not long after 4 men tried to shave his beard. They seized him and tried to do so forcibly. Mr. Palmer fought them off with a jackknife despite being injured in the assault. Mr. Palmer was charged with an unprovoked assault, arrested and fined. He refused to pay it and was jailed. He was in jail for over a year.

Mr. Palmer smuggled out letters describing his jail conditions, and anything else he had on his mind and of course complaining loudly that he had a right to wear a beard. Several attempts were made to forcibly remove Mr. Palmer’s beard while he was jailed. They all failed. His letters, which were published in newspapers made Mr. Palmer a celebrity and deeply embarrassed the good people of Fitchburg. He was finally told to just get out. However being a curmudgeon and very angry he refused to leave until he got an apology and the charges dropped and it was publicly proclaimed it was alright to wear a beard. He proved so difficult that eventually they were forced to lift the chair he was sitting in and move him and the chair out into the street outside the jail.

Afterwards Mr. Palmer became a sort of minor New England celebrity much involved in literary, Abolitionist and Temperance circles. He also lived along (1875 C.E.) enough to see beards become fashionable.5

Now what does Joseph Palmer’s rather bizarre story have to do with beards today? Well despite the amount of time that as past since this rather absurd series of events. There are large elements in our society that when they see male facial hair go EEEEEEWWWWWW YUCK!!! Men with beards are accused of “hiding” their appearance, of being unclean etc. Often a beard is described as an affectation. This is of Interest since if anything is an affectation it is shaving it off, which can be described as a form of bodily mutilation. Since having a beard is “natural” for most men, shaving it off is clearly “unnatural”, and that is the affectation.

The period of the nineteenth century and early twentieth century during which beards were fashionable did not last and beginning with the first world war and after beards declined and then almost completely disappeared and in fact by the 50’s even moustaches were rare among North American men. Of course this time period was also a period of truly stifling conformity in terms of looks. What with similar, haircuts, dress and all clean shaven men looked very much alike.6

So the beard fell into disrepute and even movies during this time period had hirsute individuals from history clean shaven. A classic example of this is Charlton Heston’s clean shaven Judah Ben Hur from the movie Ben Hur. It is highly unlikely that a believing, Palestinian Jew of the 1st century C.E., would NOT have a beard. Of course Jesus had to be shown with a beard because that is part of the iconography of the image of Jesus. That it is also correct is basically an accident.7

Now I know from people I’ve talked to that and from working with job finders that it is recommended that when you are looking for work that you shave off the beard because a lot of people react negatively to beards.

The arguments that beards are unclean sort of ignores the fact that shaving rips the skin of your face to shreds. The itch that many guys feel after stopping shaving is usually their skin healing!8

As to why men in today’s society grow beards? Well in my case it is because I can’t stand shaving. I would grow a full beard but I cannot, so I have this goatee. I still get people who tell me that I would look better if I shaved it off. Well I can only say is you can take my beard off after I’m dead; as far as I’m concerned it is staying on until then.

The Author

This lingering phobia about beards which goes with a lingering phobia about body hair in general is a rather deeply entrenched dislike which I think is rooted in attitudes towards cleanliness and death. Body hair being associated with un-cleanliness and filth and hence death.9

If a beard is good enough for Jesus; it is good enough for me.

Jesus Christ

1. Muscarella, Frank, & Cunningham, Michael R., The evolutionary significance and social perception of male pattern baldness and facial hair, Ethnology and Sociobiology, V. 17, No. 2, 1996, pp. 99-117.

2. Locke, Philip, Male Images in the Gay Mass Media and Bear-Oriented Magazines: Analysis and Contrast, The Bear Book, Editor Wright, Les, Harrington Park Press, New York, 1997, pp. 103-140, at pp. 106-108.

3. Mackay, Charles, Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds, Woodsworth Editions Ltd., London, 1995, pp. 346-353.

4. Holbrook, Stewart, The Beard of Joseph Palmer, The Bear Book II, Editor Wright, Les, Harrington Park Press, New York, 2001, pp. 95-102, at p. 96. Originally published in The American Scholar, v. 13, No. 4, (Autumn 1944), pp. 55-58.

5. IBID, pp. 96-102.

6. Brian, Greg, Growing a Beard, Here.

7. Shaving in Judaism, Wikipedia, Here.

8. Shaving, Wikipedia, Here.

9. Locke, pp. 104-108.

Pierre Cloutier