Erich von Däniken
One of the most successful and influential of all Bad Archaeologists is the Swiss former hotelier, Erich von Däniken (born 1935). He caused controversy in the late 1960s with his popularisation of what has become known as the ‘ancient astronaut hypothesis’, although he was by no means the first to propose it. His first book, Chariots of the Gods?, published in 1967 after no fewer than twenty-two rejections, became a worldwide bestseller, thanks in no small part to its tone: a strident attack on hide-bound academia by one who dared to speak his mind. He was not the first fringe writer to adopt this stance and he has not been the last: expert bashing has become an important cultural cliché over the past half century or so. The ups and downs of his career have seen him arrested for fraud, become a global media personality and, ultimately, made him wealthy through the sale of over sixty million copies of his books. He has consistently claimed that the remains of ancient cultures can only be explained by extraterrestrial interventions in human history.
The ‘Great Martian God’, a rock painting discovered in the Tassilli mountains by Henri Lhote and said by von Däniken to be a representation of an alien wearing a spacesuit
During an early career as a waiter, he was able to save for extensive travels in which he hoped to find evidence for an idea he had developed through reading the Bible (and, although he does not admit as much, it is clear from the outset that he got many of his ideas from his reading of the works of speculative writes such as Louis Pauwels and Jacques Bergier, Robert Charroux and Peter Kolosimo): that extraterrestrials had meddled in human history. The piece of evidence he considers the most convincing that he has ever produced is the cover slab of the tomb of the Lord Pacal in the Pyramid of the Inscriptions at Palenque, weak stuff though it is. Moreover, his description and interpretation are not original: they derive from an article by Guy Tarade and A Millou in an Italian magazine Clypeus, published in October 1966. He saw it as a representation of a humanoid being in a space capsule and it became the cover image for the hardback publication of the English edition of Chariots of the Gods?. Subsequent books took his search for evidence farther afield and he even dabbled in analyses of religious visions (Miracles of the Gods) and Greek mythology.
The spacemen gods
Like so many fringe writers, von Däniken cannot accept that ancient peoples had spiritual experiences or imaginations. Whenever people in the past wrote about ‘gods’ and ‘heaven’ they were thinking about how to express their incomprehension of vastly superior technology.
Because the gods of so many ancient cultures are associated with the sky or with objects in the sky, such as the sun and moon, von Däniken believes that there must be a literal connection. In a late twentieth-century context, they can be identified with the beings that were being recorded from the early 1950s onwards as pilots of Unidentified Flying Objects, who claimed to those with whom they made contact that they had come from other planets. Although von Däniken remains surprisingly agnostic about UFOs, the connection is clear: the gods of ancient myth were space travellers whose craft are identical with those phenomena that UFO enthusiasts regard as historical records of ‘flying saucers’.
Alien artefacts?
Human artefacts record their presence on earth
A restored Parthian jar, claimed to be an electric cell
Von Däniken uses an assortment of out-of-place artefacts and spectacular monuments to provide evidence for his thesis. He seems to regard all of them as human creations, albeit aided or inspired by space travellers (unlike Alan Alford, who claimed that the Great Pyramid had been built by the Anunnaki as an apparatus for splitting water molecules to provide hydrogen fuel for spacecraft…). Nevertheless, he believes that the artefacts he uses to suggest alien contact could not have been developed the peoples using them: the ‘Batteries of Babylon’, for instance, cannot be an invention of the Persians of the first millennium BCE, but must be a degenerate version of something originally more sophisticated of extraterrestrial origin. Most of these pieces of evidence involve the same argument: these creations are too complex to be the unaided products of ancient humans because those humans lacked the technical expertise to create them.
Much of the argument is almost racist: the people of distant times lack the mental capacities of the alien ‘gods’ – just as the people of distant places in more recent centuries were claimed to lack the mental capacities of the ‘superior’ Europeans who ruled them.
Among the artefacts, though, are pieces unknown to conventional archaeology, such as the gold objects allegedly found in cave systems in Ecuador. In addition, for the most part, he provides no references to where the material has been published or where it can be viewed. This poses problems for the serious researcher who may wish to follow up claims about specific pieces of evidence. Parts of Chariots of the Gods?, for example, consist of lists of artefacts that are effectively meaningless as they lack any contextual information or detail.
The gods themselves left nothing behind
Whilst some sceptics might consider it necessary to identify the products of the aliens themselves, this does not appear to be a problem for von Däniken. He seems to believe that, unlike humans, the space travellers were able to do all sorts of things while on earth that have left no trace in the archaeological record. The only evidence is evidence by proxy: the anthropogenic material he identifies as inspired by the aliens.
Genetically modified humans?
Like a number of fringe writers, von Däniken has immense difficulties with the origins of the human species, as well as of human civilisation. He finds the transition from archaic to modern forms to be too rapid to be accounted for by evolution and is evidently troubled by the common assertion of religions that humans have been created in a god’s image. To him, this is evidence for the special creation of humanity. Where he differs from the creationists, though, is in his insistence that when ancient texts speak of ‘gods’, they actually mean ‘astronauts’ (hence the subtitle of the English translation of Chariots of the Gods?: Was God an Astronaut?). Humans were created in the (relatively) recent past by the selective interbreeding of spacemen with proto-human females.
Pingback: Pushing the “aliens built the Great Pyramid” lie « Bad Archaeology
It worries me that a person is prepared to go to the extent of develpoing an entire website called “badarchaeology.com” solely for the purpose of attacking authors, without actually reading their work!. Firstly Erich Von Daniken has never posed or painted himself in the light of an ‘archaeologist’ he is, and always has been a ‘Theorist’. His book s do exactly what they set out to do, which is provoke independant thought; as apposed to merely going with the various “Stabbing in the dark” that archaeologists do. He is a religious man, raised a strict Catholic, with a strong belief in God and he is not “evidently troubled by the common assertion of religions” but proposes that there may be other explanations for SOME of the recorded events that have been attributed to the works of a devine creator. At no point does he suggest that religion is incorrect, but that sightings recorded in ancient texts could, possibly, be real and actual accounts of events that happened in a truely physical way. He is uncomfortable with the idea that ‘God’ in whom he believes, is painted as the giver of free will yet the destroyer of those that have ventured off his preferred path. He has taken true archaeological findings that, over the years, have had endless proposed explanations; all of which have been handed down to schools and published with very little hard eveidence supporting them, and said “Given the incredible size of the cosmos and the mathmatical probability of there being intelligent life on other planets before our own, why is it so hard to believe that we might have been visited and those visitations have been interpreted as divine happenings by a religiously driven society?”
Personally, I would recommend that you read the books for yourself. Start with CHARIOTS OF THE GODS?, see what you think and, if you don’t want to accept the theortical possibility that history has puzzle-pieces missing and that without those pieces we can not possibly find TRUE explanations, then put the book down and don’t read the next one… Isn’t it incredible, the thought that you aren’t being forced to believe something just because someone else believes it???
As for whoever wrote the review on this site… You have too much spare time that is ill used.
Thank you for the gratuitous insult.
I read Chariots of the Gods? when I was ten years old, when it was serialised in an English newspaper. I bought the paperback when it cam out a couple of years later, followed by Return to the Stars, The Gold of the Gods, Miracles of the Gods and According to the Evidence. I have read every single one of them. Not just once, not even just twice but many times.
As I’ve said until I’m blue in the face, I’m perfectly open to the idea that there are things in the past that require a different explanation from the one given by mainstream archaeologists and historians. The problem is that people like von Däniken speculate without providing the slightest shred of viable evidence for their ideas. His books are badly written, full of non sequiturs and speculation piled on speculation then repeated as if proven fact. The man can’t string a coherent argument together, so why would I believe a word he writes?
The reason I spend time putting this site together is that there are too many people like you, taken in by frauds like von Däniken, who need to be given access to facts when the web is generally filled with rubbish that promotes ‘alternative’ (i.e. wrong) views of human achievement.
I heartily agree! Never having read von Daniken’s books (his TV “documentaries” were insulting enough), I was impressed only on the number of unsupported assertations he could raise with the minimum amount of evidence to induce the maximum amount of hyperbole.
Indeed his initial book on “astronauts” was even titled “Chariots of the Gods?”….with a QUESTION MARK behind it, as if he was unsure in his own work to the degree that he was afraid to make a definitive statement of fact.
His “theories” are extremely thin bits of heavily edited evidence, followed by “Isn’t it possible…?”, “could it be…?”, “what is the chance…?”…..and so on. I’m wondering if the question mark isn’t von Daniken’s favorite punctuation mark.
A huge push for EVD’s “work” came from a compelling TV program that was televised about the time “Chariot’s…” came out in the USA. The image of astonished Javanese (?) tribesmen looking skyward towards an airplane which apparently they had never seen before was compelling enough to cause me to buy the book.
It was
It is a shame my comments were deleted from the site – I provided a coherent intellectual reasoning with nothing personal whatsoever, a simple argument basing my comments on the so-called unbiased information on this site. I hope my following observations remain on the site to add to a reasoned and wholesome debate:
“The reason I spend time putting this site together is that there are too many people like you, taken in by frauds like von Däniken, who need to be given access to facts when the web is generally filled with rubbish that promotes ‘alternative’ (i.e. wrong) views of human achievement.”
I thank and appreciate your perspective, I think I see what you mean, however, put quite simply, I very much doubt, as we are dealing with history, and also pre-history (his-story – part fictionalized it can be argued) the realm of ancient history is that of theory, NOT fact – hence the such accused ‘rubbish’ assertions of the much maligned Von Daniken – without backing any particular ‘theory’ it seems plausible that there should be alternative theories, however wild, to ask relevant and as yet subjectively answered questions (such as those espoused by modern day archaeology), which authors and researchers should be encouraged to do, rather than stamped down and ridiculed with scorn (which seems to be this site’s ambition – to me, personally, that smacks of arrogance and also ignorance).
“The problem is that people like von Däniken speculate without providing the slightest shred of viable evidence for their ideas. “
I understand your points, thank you for sharing, let me elaborate for you and try and help you understand alternative perspectives, which I hope you will agree is actually a healthy idea: To explain further from my points, the purpose of theory making, is to speculate and elaborate– this is the foundation upon which a lot of our understanding of pre-history is based – now, such a celebrity like Daniken has made inconsistent claims to the overall evidence, however, I think you will find that there are many authors and professionals who do indeed look into these areas with a fuller, more accurate approach. Essentially, Von Daniken is interpreting ancient manuscripts at face value – the argument that on one hand ‘the aliens didn’t build the pyramids’ (actually an inaccurate summation of a claim from ancient astronaut theorists) while on the other hand there is a trend in modern day mainstream academia to revert ancient man to the delusional and metaphorical – NOT the actual physical interpretation that, yes, ancient man was re-telling actual events. To argue that the ancient astronaut theory, along with wider interpretations (such as seemingly banded together in one heap with ufos, conspiracy theory and spirituality/religion) this is unyielding and again, forgive me, but arrogant – as I have reasonably evidenced.
“Indeed his initial book on “astronauts” was even titled “Chariots of the Gods?”….with a QUESTION MARK behind it, as if he was unsure in his own work to the degree that he was afraid to make a definitive statement of fact.”
I understand your points, however, Von Daniken is an amateur, not a professional researcher as you will certainly agree, with this in mind, it is his role, his right, to raise questions and ‘unsupported assertions’ – THAT is the whole purpose, not to give blanket factual and subjective arguments painted in a black and white fashion – he has a flawed argument concerning certain details as you know, however, that does not mean that the ancient astronaut theory is flawed. As you will no doubt agree, ancient history is perspectives, hence, this is exactly why we SHOULD have arguments from many arenas, no matter how flawed, to further realize our history and understand subjective evidence.
In conclusion to the above points, both for and against the argument that the ancient astronaut theory is unsupported or ill evidenced comes down to a basic understanding of mankind, academia, establishment and history – with the birth of a very new idea to science (since the mid to late last century) of the ancient astronaut theory, it has been met by stern opposition by many in the professional mainstream establishment exactly how new ideas were opposed throughout time within science.
However, wild theories such as men descending from apes, giant monsters roaming the Earth and a gigantic bang to begin the universe were once regarded as lunacy.
Thank you.
I’m not sure which comments have been deleted. I try not to delete comments unless they are offensive (and, believe me, I have had some really personal attacks in comments by people who have clearly spent time looking for information about me).
I am hearing an awful lot of ‘I understand’, but frankly, I think your lying. Couldn’t it be that any one of the pieces of so called ‘evidence’ that Daniken shows is actually just normal human development, artistic imagination, hyperbolic witnesses, and architectural genius? <— There's that annoying question mark again.
Like all people who have striven to pass on great truths and revelations,this man has also been subject to typical human behavior;disregarding the truth because of fright.There is so much evidence to suggest that Extraterrestrials had and still have a huge influence on mankind. If modern science and world governments told the truth about UFOs and all the other controversial stuff found on mars and our moon and also the many anomalies out in space then maybe people would not be too quick to announce this prophet as an idiot but realize that he is passing on great truths that must be known to all.History is wrong, science is flawed and we are told lie after lie. We have become like gods, we will leave this earth and live in space, and return to help out. we will be called gods and there will be scientists who disbelieve it and lead humanity astray. It is as simple as that.
If that is your vision of the future of humanity, then who am I to argue with it. My question is: how does the energy necessary for interstellar travel get paid for?
I have no problem with this website, Bad Archaelogy, referring to the works of Mr von Däniken. He describes himself as a Sunday archaeologist in “Return to the Stars”, so quite clearly wants to paint or pose as an archaeologist, otherwise he wouldn’t use the term at all.
As has been pointed out, he cannot substantiate any of his theories. An 8 year old child can theorise that the Moon is made of cheese. It takes much more to prove a theory. Erich von Däniken uses the absence of evidence as a major support for his works. Decent science doesn’t need such parlour tricks.
I’m sorry to say that his books don’t even read particularly well. As has been pointed out above, he has a dreadful habit of using far too many non sequiturs.
As a keen reader of science fiction books, I put his works in this category too, although such authors as Arthur C Clarke and Isaac Asimov filled their books with more science fact.