What do you think?
Rate this book
The Aryan Christ: The Secret Life of Carl Jung
Carl Gustav Jung, along with Sigmund Freud, is one of the two most influential figures of the modern age. His ideas have shaped perceptions of the world. His theories of myth, archetypes & the collective unconscious have become part of popular culture. Now, in this controversial, impeccably researched biography, Richard Noll reveals Jung as an all-too-human genius who, believing he was a spiritual prophet, founded a neopagan religious movement that offered mysteries for a new age. The Aryan Christ is the previously untold story of the 1st 60 years of his life--a story that follows him from his 1875 birth into a family troubled with madness & religious obsession, thru his career as a famous psychiatrist & relationship & break with Freud, & on to his years as an early commentator on the 3rd Reich in the 30s. It contains never-before-published revelations about his life & the lives of his most intimate followers--details that either were deliberately suppressed by his family & disciples or have been newly excavated from archives in Europe & America. Noll traces the influence on his ideas of the occultism, mysticism & racism of 19th-century German culture, demonstrating how his idealization of primitive man has at its roots the Volkish movement of his own day, which championed a vision of an idyllic pre-Christian, Aryan past. Noll marshals evidence to create the 1st full account of his private & public lives--his advocacy of polygamy as a spiritual path & his affairs with female disciples; his neopaganism & polytheism; his anti-Semitism; & his use of self-induced trance states & the pivotal visionary experience in which he saw himself reborn as a lion-headed god from an ancient cult. The Aryan Christ captures the charged atmosphere of Jung's era & presents a cast of characters no novelist could dream up, among them Edith Rockefeller McCormick--whose story is fully told here for the 1st time; the lonely, agoraphobic daughter of John D. Rockefeller, who moved to Zurich to be near Jung & spent millions to help him launch his religious movement. As Noll writes, "Jung is more interesting...because of his humanity, not his semidivinity." In giving a fuller portrait of this 20th-century icon, The Aryan Christ is a book with wide implications.
334 pages, Hardcover
First published August 26, 1997
About the author
Richard Noll
14 books13 followersDr. Richard Dean Noll, Ph.D. (Clinical Psychology, New School for Social Research, 1992; B.A., Political Science, University of Arizona, 1979), is a clinical psychologist, historian of medicine, and Associate Professor of Psychology in the College of Sciences at DeSales University (Pennsylvania). Previously, he taught and conducted research at Harvard University for four years as a postdoctoral fellow and as Lecturer on the History of Science. During the 1995–1996 academic year, he was a visiting scholar at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and a resident fellow at the Dibner Institute for the History of Science and Technology.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 19 of 19 reviews
June 28, 2026
Richard Noll is every Jungian's worst nightmare – a hostile biographer who has out-researched all the friendly ones. To be fair, this is neither entirely hostile nor entirely a biography, but it's close enough to both to be enormously challenging and entertaining. Having now read a great number of books both by and about Jung, I don't think there is anyone who understands his world better than Noll, or anyone that explains him more revealingly – as long as you keep his biases in mind.
The focus here is squarely on Jung's mystical beliefs – precisely the area, in other words, that Jung himself tried to downplay to posterity. Noll sets out his stall early:
And I think he justifies these contentions pretty well, through careful reference both to Jung's own writings – public and private – and to the diaries and analytic journals of some of those in analysis with him, many of which he seems to have tracked down for the first time.
While most ‘official’ histories of Jung see his collaboration with Freud as the key source of his ideas, Noll instead argues convincingly that those years were more of a ‘transition period’ during which his perennial concerns (spiritualism, pagan mythology, dissociative psychology) were ‘briefly syncretised with psychoanalytic thought’. After the break with Freud in 1913, he went right back to those core concerns but using slightly different names.
Jung's experiences with the supernatural were always important to him. He grew up in a family full of mediums, thought he had two distinct personalities (one scientific and one mystical), had visions of the future, and regularly communed with a Hellenistic spirit guide named Philemon. In psychoanalysis, he saw a new route to what the ancients had experienced in the mystery religions of Mithras or Eleusis – namely, personal contact with the divine in the form of self-deification. Jung himself told followers that he had experienced this, seeing himself transformed into a lion-headed Mithraic god called Aion.
He warned his followers (disciples?) that the public was not yet ready to hear these ideas, and so he couched them, Noll argues, in psychological cover names – the Land of the Dead became the ‘collective unconscious’, the mysterious entities he encountered became ‘dominants’ and later ‘archetypes’, and self-deification became ‘individuation’. While official Jungians see his mystical ideas as metaphors for his psychological concepts, Noll takes exactly the reverse view. And honestly, that is much more consistent with how Jung actually spoke of them.
When I read Jung, I am reminded of people like William Blake or even Phillip K Dick, who also experienced strange psychotic episodes and used them for creative energy. Jung himself was all too aware of how close to psychosis his spiritual explorations were – he kept a loaded gun in his bedside table, and told his mistress that he was ready to blow his brains out if he thought he had tipped over into madness.
Noll's strength is his wide reading in Jung's intellectual world – the swirling currents of Germanic mythology, proto-hippie ideas, archaeological research and scientific innovation that were in the air in the early twentieth century. His weakness is a fixation on Jung's slim connections to Nazism and a tendency, too, to over-egg the occultism unnecessarily (so that even a passing mention of The Magic Flute becomes a reference to ‘Mozart's Masonic mystery opera’).
Still, this is a brilliantly weird and eye-opening story written in the margins of the twentieth century you think you know, a story full of wildly inappropriate relationships, inner voices, polygamy, forgotten gods, strange revelations and naked dancers, all of it tied rigorously to primary text sources. Noll has nothing to declare but his bloody-mindedness and a fat bibliography, and it's best to cling on and enjoy the ride.
The focus here is squarely on Jung's mystical beliefs – precisely the area, in other words, that Jung himself tried to downplay to posterity. Noll sets out his stall early:
I am convinced by the historical evidence that Jung believed himself to be a religious prophet with extraordinary powers. I further believe that despite his multiple professional personas of physician, psychotherapist, and social critic, he consciously devoted his life to promoting the growth of a religious community centered on his personality and his teachings.
And I think he justifies these contentions pretty well, through careful reference both to Jung's own writings – public and private – and to the diaries and analytic journals of some of those in analysis with him, many of which he seems to have tracked down for the first time.
While most ‘official’ histories of Jung see his collaboration with Freud as the key source of his ideas, Noll instead argues convincingly that those years were more of a ‘transition period’ during which his perennial concerns (spiritualism, pagan mythology, dissociative psychology) were ‘briefly syncretised with psychoanalytic thought’. After the break with Freud in 1913, he went right back to those core concerns but using slightly different names.
Jung's experiences with the supernatural were always important to him. He grew up in a family full of mediums, thought he had two distinct personalities (one scientific and one mystical), had visions of the future, and regularly communed with a Hellenistic spirit guide named Philemon. In psychoanalysis, he saw a new route to what the ancients had experienced in the mystery religions of Mithras or Eleusis – namely, personal contact with the divine in the form of self-deification. Jung himself told followers that he had experienced this, seeing himself transformed into a lion-headed Mithraic god called Aion.
He warned his followers (disciples?) that the public was not yet ready to hear these ideas, and so he couched them, Noll argues, in psychological cover names – the Land of the Dead became the ‘collective unconscious’, the mysterious entities he encountered became ‘dominants’ and later ‘archetypes’, and self-deification became ‘individuation’. While official Jungians see his mystical ideas as metaphors for his psychological concepts, Noll takes exactly the reverse view. And honestly, that is much more consistent with how Jung actually spoke of them.
When I read Jung, I am reminded of people like William Blake or even Phillip K Dick, who also experienced strange psychotic episodes and used them for creative energy. Jung himself was all too aware of how close to psychosis his spiritual explorations were – he kept a loaded gun in his bedside table, and told his mistress that he was ready to blow his brains out if he thought he had tipped over into madness.
Noll's strength is his wide reading in Jung's intellectual world – the swirling currents of Germanic mythology, proto-hippie ideas, archaeological research and scientific innovation that were in the air in the early twentieth century. His weakness is a fixation on Jung's slim connections to Nazism and a tendency, too, to over-egg the occultism unnecessarily (so that even a passing mention of The Magic Flute becomes a reference to ‘Mozart's Masonic mystery opera’).
Still, this is a brilliantly weird and eye-opening story written in the margins of the twentieth century you think you know, a story full of wildly inappropriate relationships, inner voices, polygamy, forgotten gods, strange revelations and naked dancers, all of it tied rigorously to primary text sources. Noll has nothing to declare but his bloody-mindedness and a fat bibliography, and it's best to cling on and enjoy the ride.
June 3, 2015
I first saw this biography at a bookshop in my neighborhood, skimmed through it, looked at the pictures, thought about buying it but then saw the price and decided to wait. Fortunately, friends in California had a copy, allowing me to read it during a visit.
Like Sterns' The Haunted Prophet, this is an expose of Jung, disclosing facts and rumors about the psychiatrist that are excluded from his pseudo-autobiography, Memories, Dreams, Reflections, and from the various hagiographies written by his students and friends. What appears is not attractive. Not only was Jung given to the uncritical acceptation of self-serving beliefs (in parapsychology, astrology and, for a time, race theory), but he was an irresponsible professional (having sexual relations with patients) and family man (benefitting from the wealth of a wife towards whom he was unfaithful). The circle he created about himself in Zurich had many of the characteristics of a mostly female cult to which he was the high priest.
Jung was also a serious thinker, however outlandish, whose educational background was much broader than that of many of his colleagues and fellow psychiatrists. Weak as an empirical researcher (excluding his early word-association work), he was accomplished in discerning the connections between individual and collective imaginings and in conveying to his patients the sense that their sufferings were meaningful. Having been psychotic himself and having experimented with psychoactives, he had unusual insight into some extreme states of mind. It is not difficult to see why he obtained such a passionate following. Indeed, I myself was a follower as a young man, a member of the local Jung society and an attender of their lecture series.
While there is much to criticize in depth psychology, one truth is that of the transference. Most of the more serious psychological problems of persons stem from upbringing, relate to the personalities and habits of parents and caretakers. Freedom from these problems occurs when one recognizes them and their sources, an intellectual enterprise, relatively easy to accomplish, and when the suppressed/repressed traumata are abreacted, an emotional enterprise, often quite time consuming and exhausting, often quite guarded by defenses. The efficacy of the abreaction, and the initial circumvention of the defenses, is substantially dependent on the transference, the tendency of the analysand to emotionally react to the analyst as if s/he were the problematic parent or caretaker. Jung's own appearance (he was a physically impressive man throughout life) and his inflated manner of speech and behavior lended themselves quite well to the transference, particularly from women.
What Jung often failed to manage was (1) working through the transference with his analysands until it was dissolved and (2) controlling, sometimes, his own counter-transferences. Indeed, it must be attractive to have slavishly devoted female acolytes, particularly when one has an ideology which allows one to excuse this as a mutual regard for the same numinous archetypes--towards which, of course, one effectively serves as high priest if not 'animus' or 'wise old man' or whatever from Jung's own sketchily conceived catalogue of supposed 'archetypes of the collective unconscious'.
My own disenchantment with Jung stems from several factors, not least his weak moral character. As regards the above, however, my interest in depth psychology and aversion to practicing it professionally stems from considerations of my own weaknesses as seen reflected in some of Jung's practice.
Like Sterns' The Haunted Prophet, this is an expose of Jung, disclosing facts and rumors about the psychiatrist that are excluded from his pseudo-autobiography, Memories, Dreams, Reflections, and from the various hagiographies written by his students and friends. What appears is not attractive. Not only was Jung given to the uncritical acceptation of self-serving beliefs (in parapsychology, astrology and, for a time, race theory), but he was an irresponsible professional (having sexual relations with patients) and family man (benefitting from the wealth of a wife towards whom he was unfaithful). The circle he created about himself in Zurich had many of the characteristics of a mostly female cult to which he was the high priest.
Jung was also a serious thinker, however outlandish, whose educational background was much broader than that of many of his colleagues and fellow psychiatrists. Weak as an empirical researcher (excluding his early word-association work), he was accomplished in discerning the connections between individual and collective imaginings and in conveying to his patients the sense that their sufferings were meaningful. Having been psychotic himself and having experimented with psychoactives, he had unusual insight into some extreme states of mind. It is not difficult to see why he obtained such a passionate following. Indeed, I myself was a follower as a young man, a member of the local Jung society and an attender of their lecture series.
While there is much to criticize in depth psychology, one truth is that of the transference. Most of the more serious psychological problems of persons stem from upbringing, relate to the personalities and habits of parents and caretakers. Freedom from these problems occurs when one recognizes them and their sources, an intellectual enterprise, relatively easy to accomplish, and when the suppressed/repressed traumata are abreacted, an emotional enterprise, often quite time consuming and exhausting, often quite guarded by defenses. The efficacy of the abreaction, and the initial circumvention of the defenses, is substantially dependent on the transference, the tendency of the analysand to emotionally react to the analyst as if s/he were the problematic parent or caretaker. Jung's own appearance (he was a physically impressive man throughout life) and his inflated manner of speech and behavior lended themselves quite well to the transference, particularly from women.
What Jung often failed to manage was (1) working through the transference with his analysands until it was dissolved and (2) controlling, sometimes, his own counter-transferences. Indeed, it must be attractive to have slavishly devoted female acolytes, particularly when one has an ideology which allows one to excuse this as a mutual regard for the same numinous archetypes--towards which, of course, one effectively serves as high priest if not 'animus' or 'wise old man' or whatever from Jung's own sketchily conceived catalogue of supposed 'archetypes of the collective unconscious'.
My own disenchantment with Jung stems from several factors, not least his weak moral character. As regards the above, however, my interest in depth psychology and aversion to practicing it professionally stems from considerations of my own weaknesses as seen reflected in some of Jung's practice.
March 3, 2015
It's very difficult to write a review about this book, without being unfair to the few merits we find here. The main reason for this is the evidently biased and tendencious way in which it is written. Noll states a thesis that is very simple: "Jung was the leader of a sect which saw himself as a god incarnated, the Aryan Christ" (those words are mine, not the exact words Noll use). If you see the front cover, there are words like "promiscuity", "ocultism", "life secret", which all have a sensationalist fashion.
In every chapter there are statements that would not only offend Jungians profoundly and are sometimes difficult to believe, but that contradict themselves constantly. The chapters that look more plausible are, curiously enough, the ones about the "Apostles", three women that were analysed by Jung and after practiced analysis to other patients. But I found that the same as viewing Christ's works by the light of the mistakes his apostles did.
I found recently a review that is very objective and useful in the web. It is by Donivan Bessinger, and it's entitled "Cult and Controversy: Richard Noll versus Carl G. Jung". The link is here http://home.earthlink.net/~dbscr/pler... Be careful, it has some spoilers.
As I said, the book has some merits. That's why I give it two stars instead of one.
In every chapter there are statements that would not only offend Jungians profoundly and are sometimes difficult to believe, but that contradict themselves constantly. The chapters that look more plausible are, curiously enough, the ones about the "Apostles", three women that were analysed by Jung and after practiced analysis to other patients. But I found that the same as viewing Christ's works by the light of the mistakes his apostles did.
I found recently a review that is very objective and useful in the web. It is by Donivan Bessinger, and it's entitled "Cult and Controversy: Richard Noll versus Carl G. Jung". The link is here http://home.earthlink.net/~dbscr/pler... Be careful, it has some spoilers.
As I said, the book has some merits. That's why I give it two stars instead of one.
August 3, 2016
As you can see from the diversity of viewpoints expressed both here and in reviews of Noll's "The Jung Cult", this is a highly controversial history of Jung's work with an emphasis on aspects that Noll claims have been suppressed. When I was debating whether or not to buy this book, I found one seemingly scholarly review that called it "bad history" and, just now wondering whether I should say what I am about to write, I did further searches and found several other, seemingly reasonable reviews which take Noll to task for bad scholarship. So, as one should always, I will try to remain open to the possibility that I have been misled. But the diary extracts, letters, and other source material from which Noll's conclusions are drawn are carefully footnoted and mostly gleaned from libraries where anyone could easily show deception if that were the case. So, for the moment, Noll has convinced me that there is a dark side (both in the Jungian and conventional sense) to Jung.
I came to this book with a very high regard for Jung and seeing him as a guardian of truth in standing up to Freud's dogmatic insistence on the sexual basis of all neuroses. I still regard Jung as brilliant and having made extremely important contributions to humanity, but I now see a more balanced picture. Freud may have been too focused on sexuality, but apparently so was Jung, although in a much more personal way. Noll provides a convincing picture of Jung as being secretly dogmatic that a form of free love is essential to psychological health. Jung's sexual relationships with patients and coworkers, and his advice to patients to have extramarital affairs seem incontrovertible based on the evidence presented here.
I suspect that much of the criticism of Noll is based on his evidence that Jung was heavily into an Aryan world viewpoint, which immediately conjures up Nazi stereotypes in our minds. Noll repeatedly tries to counteract that understandable tendency, saying for example (last paragraph of the Introduction) "But the most troublesome part of this story comes from asking you, the reader, to do the morally impossible: to imagine a world - fin-de-siecle German Kultur - in which the words "Hitler" and "Nazi" and "Holocaust" do not exist."
Along these lines, it helps to remember that many intelligent, respectable, well-meaning Americans (e.g., Lindberg, Joseph Kennedy Sr.) were early Nazi supporters, just as many were early Communist supporters. The horrendous evils perpetrated in the names of Aryanism and Communism were not present in their early philosophies. It also helps to remember that anti-Semitism and racism in general were the cultural norm througout the world until well into the 1960's or 1970's. It was almost impossible NOT to be prejudiced in Jung's time. (A related book that touches on psychoanalysis and anti-Semitism and that I highly recommend is Bakan's "Sigmund Freud and the Jewish Mystical Tradition.")
Another problem concerns Noll's evidence that Jung disparaged Christianity and secretly reverted to (as well as secretly proselytized for) an ancient, pagan, Aryan religion. Such a move will be seen through a highly distorting filter if viewed in the context of today's Christianity. Again, it is hard, but important, to view Jung's choices in terms of the dogmatic Swiss-German Christianity of the late nineteenth century.
As with most movements that believe they have the secret to saving the world, many Jungians idealize their prophet and make him into a kind of god. In contrast, the picture that emerges from "Aryan Christ" is of a brilliant man -- but a man not a god and therefore with all the attendant human frailties. The danger is in forgetting Jung's humanity.
I came to this book with a very high regard for Jung and seeing him as a guardian of truth in standing up to Freud's dogmatic insistence on the sexual basis of all neuroses. I still regard Jung as brilliant and having made extremely important contributions to humanity, but I now see a more balanced picture. Freud may have been too focused on sexuality, but apparently so was Jung, although in a much more personal way. Noll provides a convincing picture of Jung as being secretly dogmatic that a form of free love is essential to psychological health. Jung's sexual relationships with patients and coworkers, and his advice to patients to have extramarital affairs seem incontrovertible based on the evidence presented here.
I suspect that much of the criticism of Noll is based on his evidence that Jung was heavily into an Aryan world viewpoint, which immediately conjures up Nazi stereotypes in our minds. Noll repeatedly tries to counteract that understandable tendency, saying for example (last paragraph of the Introduction) "But the most troublesome part of this story comes from asking you, the reader, to do the morally impossible: to imagine a world - fin-de-siecle German Kultur - in which the words "Hitler" and "Nazi" and "Holocaust" do not exist."
Along these lines, it helps to remember that many intelligent, respectable, well-meaning Americans (e.g., Lindberg, Joseph Kennedy Sr.) were early Nazi supporters, just as many were early Communist supporters. The horrendous evils perpetrated in the names of Aryanism and Communism were not present in their early philosophies. It also helps to remember that anti-Semitism and racism in general were the cultural norm througout the world until well into the 1960's or 1970's. It was almost impossible NOT to be prejudiced in Jung's time. (A related book that touches on psychoanalysis and anti-Semitism and that I highly recommend is Bakan's "Sigmund Freud and the Jewish Mystical Tradition.")
Another problem concerns Noll's evidence that Jung disparaged Christianity and secretly reverted to (as well as secretly proselytized for) an ancient, pagan, Aryan religion. Such a move will be seen through a highly distorting filter if viewed in the context of today's Christianity. Again, it is hard, but important, to view Jung's choices in terms of the dogmatic Swiss-German Christianity of the late nineteenth century.
As with most movements that believe they have the secret to saving the world, many Jungians idealize their prophet and make him into a kind of god. In contrast, the picture that emerges from "Aryan Christ" is of a brilliant man -- but a man not a god and therefore with all the attendant human frailties. The danger is in forgetting Jung's humanity.
March 26, 2012
A fascinating history of the true story of Carl Jung. He was Freud's main rival and history records him as one of the founding members of psychology in the early 20th century. He created the concept of the 'universal unconcious', 'the archetype' and of the two kinds of intellect "introvert and extrovert.. but he never regarded these achievements as his main work.
Secretly he thought of himself as a god - a new Aryan incarnation of Jesus - and Jungian psychology was to become his new religion.
His earliest students became his converts and discples with the expressed goal of spreading his new faith throughout the world. They used oblique code words among themselves so the uninitiated would not understand the pagan thrust of Jung's work in a Christian world.
So successful was Jung, through sheer force of his magnetic personality that his brand of pyschology stood above all the other theories for decades.. and his wilder theories of a Germanic godhead were expunged from history by his followers.
In short, Jung was plunging into a personal meglomania that bordered on insanity very early in his career! And he got away with it his entire life- the Jungian Cult of his legend as a healer and insightful thinker persists to this day.
This book was an amazing read and will reinforce a world view that all psychology is bunk and all psychologists are crazy.
Secretly he thought of himself as a god - a new Aryan incarnation of Jesus - and Jungian psychology was to become his new religion.
His earliest students became his converts and discples with the expressed goal of spreading his new faith throughout the world. They used oblique code words among themselves so the uninitiated would not understand the pagan thrust of Jung's work in a Christian world.
So successful was Jung, through sheer force of his magnetic personality that his brand of pyschology stood above all the other theories for decades.. and his wilder theories of a Germanic godhead were expunged from history by his followers.
In short, Jung was plunging into a personal meglomania that bordered on insanity very early in his career! And he got away with it his entire life- the Jungian Cult of his legend as a healer and insightful thinker persists to this day.
This book was an amazing read and will reinforce a world view that all psychology is bunk and all psychologists are crazy.
October 8, 2019
Excellent book on the reality of the later life Jung, that reflects his quasi-Nazi belief that he was, yes, a sort of an Aryan Christ.
Jungian psychotherapy cultists hate this book. But, they can't refute it. Noll wrote this as a sequel to "The Jung Cult: Origins of a Charismatic Movement," and he's done his work on Jung. That book focuses more on the pseudoscience of Jungianism. This one focuses on Jung's roots in early 20th-century Volkisch ideas that arose in Germany, and Switzerland, and indirectly, at least, helped seed the rise of Nazism.
Jungian psychotherapy cultists hate this book. But, they can't refute it. Noll wrote this as a sequel to "The Jung Cult: Origins of a Charismatic Movement," and he's done his work on Jung. That book focuses more on the pseudoscience of Jungianism. This one focuses on Jung's roots in early 20th-century Volkisch ideas that arose in Germany, and Switzerland, and indirectly, at least, helped seed the rise of Nazism.
September 21, 2011
The only thing good about this books is the general description of 20th century Europe in the context of literature, and popular movements. This provides a unique insight into the environment that might have influenced Jung. However this book is nothing more than a polemic of the losest kind. Anyone who has read the works of Jung and the biographies on him, which this present book claims NOT to be, can find the assertions found therein easy to refute.
October 12, 2023
Despite its many problems (which I will get into), this book is a must-read for anyone interested in Jung and his ideas, even though it's highly critical of them, because opposition and criticism are crucial for growth and it's necessary to keep an open mind to alternative perspectives.
I appreciated the light this book shone on Jung's constant promotion of infidelity to his patients and loved ones, indulging quite a bit in it himself. Elsewhere it's discussed way too little, and this book made it clear to me that it's possibly the single most harmful and evil part of Jung's philosophy and life. It's good that the book discusses it extensively.
The most valuable contribution I found in this book is how Jung's family and cultural milieu may have influenced many of his ideas. This is important for Jungian discussion and I think it justifies a read.
That being said, I have my criticisms of some of the points the author makes and the method used.
The book takes any opportunity to exaggerate or spin and runs with it. If someone used a spiritual metaphor once, it's taken literally as a fantasy they are trying to enact in real life. Countless times, Jung's technical use of symbols and myth is misrepresented as literal or evangelical. If someone expressed enthusiasm for a cause, defending or supporting it when given the chance, they are portrayed as religious zealots. A religious attitude is at every turn conflated with religion itself. Section headings and quotations play fast and loose with context and technical meaning in order to sensationalize and imply. The author is extremely liberal with interpretation, peppering his readings of the evidence with variations of "it seems", "it appears", "maybe", etc., making as many assumptions as necessary to attribute intentions to Jung and interpret his meanings. At some points, the book egregiously mistranscribes people's words, and often conflates the ideas of Moltzer with Jung's.
The introduction says that the author is convinced by the historical evidence that Jung believed himself a prophet and magical healer that would bring about a new age, but that is never truly substantiated (only insistently repeated), instead what is actually demonstrated by the evidence is that, at most, Jung saw himself as a revolutionary thinker who could help people heal from the crisis of meaning, by synthesizing science and spirituality.
To claim that Jung envisioned himself as "the Aryan Christ" is particularly far-fetched and sensationalist, with the author focusing on "Aryanism" a lot more than Jung ever did. I think he also fundamentally misunderstands individuation, which is not as centered on rebirth or redemption as the book would have you believe.
The impetus for Jung-related associations and Clubs didn't come from Jung, but from his patients and colleagues. He always disliked collective endeavors and institutions, and despised "isms" and dogma. He openly criticized psychic inflation, explicitly stating that one should not set oneself up as a psychoanalytic prophet or world reformer. To claim he founded a cult is rather ill-fitting.
Contrary to the author's claim that Jung inaugurated his "cult" with the founding of the Zürich Psychological Club, he was actually an ordinary member of the Club who never served on the executive committee, and there's no mention of the alleged inaugural address that this book gives so much importance to (with copious baseless embellishments, might I add) in the minutes of any meeting, nor any presence of its proposals in the Club's statutes, not to mention that it contains concepts Jung hadn't even developed yet at that time, and it's not even likely that Jung himself wrote it. Sonu Shamdasani did a good job demonstrating that it was most likely written by Maria Moltzer and never publicly presented. Her ideas were never taken up by the Club.
For a "cult", the analytical psychology movement has always lacked social cohesion and firm theoretical basis for both ideas and aims. This is rather by design.
Furthermore, the book namedrops in passing a lot of affairs Jung supposedly had that it doesn't bother to substantiate all that much, admitting at one point (though briefly) that some if not most of them are probably just gossip. This is not the only instance of bizarre claims made in this book with no evidence whatsoever to back them up. To list them all would take me too much time.
The non-sequitur inclusion of a comment about Jung's genitals in old age that has no relevance to any argument or point clearly shows the intention to use anything one can find to discredit or demean Jung, in childish bad faith ill-suited for an objective discussion of history.
At various points in the book, Jung is accused of deliberately lying, instead of the more likely possibility of him simply forgetting or confusing details, as he was known to do.
The author points out that Jung's experience of a "Mithraic initiation" only shows elements and symbols from the scholarly literature he had read, including things that later historical research would discredit or develop in ways that seem to cast doubt as to the legitimacy of Jung's vision as an accurate instance of the Mithraic mysteries. It also brings up many cases of Jung seemingly misrepresenting the history of patients in order to support the narrative that they didn't know the original mythological sources of many of the visions they had. This, the book argues, may indicate that the visions from the collective unconscious arise purely out of cryptomnesia instead. The argument has weight but I think it can easily be wrong. One could argue that the symbols still come from archetypes in the collective unconscious (or from Innate Releasing Mechanisms in the central nervous system, if that's your speed), and are simply influenced by the culture, knowledge and personal unconscious of the individual to become the vision they perceive. Ultimately, I will have to read more of the relevant literature to know how much this stands up.
In any case, the author of this work accuses Jung of fabricating evidence when it's plain that most of the "evidence" in this very book is itself in some way fabricated by the author, as I've explained in this review.
Regardless, I recommend giving this book a chance, taking what it says with a grain of salt.
I appreciated the light this book shone on Jung's constant promotion of infidelity to his patients and loved ones, indulging quite a bit in it himself. Elsewhere it's discussed way too little, and this book made it clear to me that it's possibly the single most harmful and evil part of Jung's philosophy and life. It's good that the book discusses it extensively.
The most valuable contribution I found in this book is how Jung's family and cultural milieu may have influenced many of his ideas. This is important for Jungian discussion and I think it justifies a read.
That being said, I have my criticisms of some of the points the author makes and the method used.
The book takes any opportunity to exaggerate or spin and runs with it. If someone used a spiritual metaphor once, it's taken literally as a fantasy they are trying to enact in real life. Countless times, Jung's technical use of symbols and myth is misrepresented as literal or evangelical. If someone expressed enthusiasm for a cause, defending or supporting it when given the chance, they are portrayed as religious zealots. A religious attitude is at every turn conflated with religion itself. Section headings and quotations play fast and loose with context and technical meaning in order to sensationalize and imply. The author is extremely liberal with interpretation, peppering his readings of the evidence with variations of "it seems", "it appears", "maybe", etc., making as many assumptions as necessary to attribute intentions to Jung and interpret his meanings. At some points, the book egregiously mistranscribes people's words, and often conflates the ideas of Moltzer with Jung's.
The introduction says that the author is convinced by the historical evidence that Jung believed himself a prophet and magical healer that would bring about a new age, but that is never truly substantiated (only insistently repeated), instead what is actually demonstrated by the evidence is that, at most, Jung saw himself as a revolutionary thinker who could help people heal from the crisis of meaning, by synthesizing science and spirituality.
To claim that Jung envisioned himself as "the Aryan Christ" is particularly far-fetched and sensationalist, with the author focusing on "Aryanism" a lot more than Jung ever did. I think he also fundamentally misunderstands individuation, which is not as centered on rebirth or redemption as the book would have you believe.
The impetus for Jung-related associations and Clubs didn't come from Jung, but from his patients and colleagues. He always disliked collective endeavors and institutions, and despised "isms" and dogma. He openly criticized psychic inflation, explicitly stating that one should not set oneself up as a psychoanalytic prophet or world reformer. To claim he founded a cult is rather ill-fitting.
Contrary to the author's claim that Jung inaugurated his "cult" with the founding of the Zürich Psychological Club, he was actually an ordinary member of the Club who never served on the executive committee, and there's no mention of the alleged inaugural address that this book gives so much importance to (with copious baseless embellishments, might I add) in the minutes of any meeting, nor any presence of its proposals in the Club's statutes, not to mention that it contains concepts Jung hadn't even developed yet at that time, and it's not even likely that Jung himself wrote it. Sonu Shamdasani did a good job demonstrating that it was most likely written by Maria Moltzer and never publicly presented. Her ideas were never taken up by the Club.
For a "cult", the analytical psychology movement has always lacked social cohesion and firm theoretical basis for both ideas and aims. This is rather by design.
Furthermore, the book namedrops in passing a lot of affairs Jung supposedly had that it doesn't bother to substantiate all that much, admitting at one point (though briefly) that some if not most of them are probably just gossip. This is not the only instance of bizarre claims made in this book with no evidence whatsoever to back them up. To list them all would take me too much time.
The non-sequitur inclusion of a comment about Jung's genitals in old age that has no relevance to any argument or point clearly shows the intention to use anything one can find to discredit or demean Jung, in childish bad faith ill-suited for an objective discussion of history.
At various points in the book, Jung is accused of deliberately lying, instead of the more likely possibility of him simply forgetting or confusing details, as he was known to do.
The author points out that Jung's experience of a "Mithraic initiation" only shows elements and symbols from the scholarly literature he had read, including things that later historical research would discredit or develop in ways that seem to cast doubt as to the legitimacy of Jung's vision as an accurate instance of the Mithraic mysteries. It also brings up many cases of Jung seemingly misrepresenting the history of patients in order to support the narrative that they didn't know the original mythological sources of many of the visions they had. This, the book argues, may indicate that the visions from the collective unconscious arise purely out of cryptomnesia instead. The argument has weight but I think it can easily be wrong. One could argue that the symbols still come from archetypes in the collective unconscious (or from Innate Releasing Mechanisms in the central nervous system, if that's your speed), and are simply influenced by the culture, knowledge and personal unconscious of the individual to become the vision they perceive. Ultimately, I will have to read more of the relevant literature to know how much this stands up.
In any case, the author of this work accuses Jung of fabricating evidence when it's plain that most of the "evidence" in this very book is itself in some way fabricated by the author, as I've explained in this review.
Regardless, I recommend giving this book a chance, taking what it says with a grain of salt.
February 22, 2018
This book makes Jung look like someone akin to Aleister Crowley, or some other self-styled guru. The main message here is that Jung used Christian terminology to cover a "neopagan" movement that was less of a new science, than an atavism to polytheistic metaphysics. That a "collective unconscious" that is such a large and persuasive part of Jungian psychology is nothing less than Jung's amalgamation of myth and mystery studies, and "cryptomnesia" which the author uses a lot, meaning lost memories returning without being recognized as such.
The biggest things I think a modern reader can learn from this is how much Spiritualism, Theosophy (Blavatsky) and Anthroposophy (Steiner) had influenced this volatile time around the world. How Germans like Jung were completely taken by Hellenic mysteries and what seemed to be a new kind of pagan revolution for the Germanic peoples, culminating in the likes of Ring-Cycles at Wagner's Bayreuth, being seen as the modern manifestation of the ancient mysteries.
It would have been interesting had Nietzsche and Jung's paths ever crossed. I feel something similar to what happened to Nietzsche with Wagner would have happened, at least based on the character portrait in this book. Carl Jung, however meek he may seem, especially in comparison to Freud's often stark views of sexual neurosis, had something inside of him that Aleister Crowley would only call The Great Beast. The solar libido within, and from a Christian perspective, this is the spirit of the Anti-Christ when not submitted to the Father's Will. It is a solar phallic energy that is not concomitant with a faith in the dying and resurrected Christ, but a burning desire for megalomania similar to biblical stories of Babylon.
At the heart of Jung's religious outlook, aside from his own sense of delving into the unknown, which he is to be given great credit for, are the Mithraic mysteries which argues Franz Cumont in his book on the topic almost became the world's dominating religion as opposed to Christianity. This shows where Jung departs from Christianity. His belief in "blood and soil" seemed to be what those who distanced themselves from him, disliked the most. There is no doubt Jung was afflicted by the Jews, in his mind, and his flirtations with National Socialism almost cost him the name he made for himself that we now know.
The biggest things I think a modern reader can learn from this is how much Spiritualism, Theosophy (Blavatsky) and Anthroposophy (Steiner) had influenced this volatile time around the world. How Germans like Jung were completely taken by Hellenic mysteries and what seemed to be a new kind of pagan revolution for the Germanic peoples, culminating in the likes of Ring-Cycles at Wagner's Bayreuth, being seen as the modern manifestation of the ancient mysteries.
It would have been interesting had Nietzsche and Jung's paths ever crossed. I feel something similar to what happened to Nietzsche with Wagner would have happened, at least based on the character portrait in this book. Carl Jung, however meek he may seem, especially in comparison to Freud's often stark views of sexual neurosis, had something inside of him that Aleister Crowley would only call The Great Beast. The solar libido within, and from a Christian perspective, this is the spirit of the Anti-Christ when not submitted to the Father's Will. It is a solar phallic energy that is not concomitant with a faith in the dying and resurrected Christ, but a burning desire for megalomania similar to biblical stories of Babylon.
At the heart of Jung's religious outlook, aside from his own sense of delving into the unknown, which he is to be given great credit for, are the Mithraic mysteries which argues Franz Cumont in his book on the topic almost became the world's dominating religion as opposed to Christianity. This shows where Jung departs from Christianity. His belief in "blood and soil" seemed to be what those who distanced themselves from him, disliked the most. There is no doubt Jung was afflicted by the Jews, in his mind, and his flirtations with National Socialism almost cost him the name he made for himself that we now know.
August 12, 2011
A fascinating biography of one of the most influential figures of the 20th century. You won't understand the modern world unless you understand Carl Jung. This book traces the cultural history of his ideas, showing how he deliberately formulated an ahistorical syncretistic religion and couched it in pseudoscientific terms in order to deify himself as the "Aryan Christ" in the minds of his followers.
June 25, 2017
'Noll’s attacks are tinged with sensationalism, even opportunism, and his attempt to frame his history as a ‘tale’, not to be taken entirely literally, hangs ambivalently between honest humility and rhetorical subterfuge. But to the extent that he provokes debate, he serves a vital purpose, perhaps complementary to the equally vital balance and detail found in the careful work of Bair’s biography.' https://dreamflesh.com/review/book/ar...
July 28, 2025
The Aryan Christ by Richard Noll is a fascinating criticism of the life and work of Carl Jung. The heated response of Jungians to this criticism is ironically evidence in favor of Noll. The sometimes gossipy nature of the claims in the book only add fuel to the controversy.
Here is what I will say: Carl Jung was secretive and misleading on purpose. Jung clearly knew that the ideas he was entertaining were controversial and he deliberately presented them differently when it was convenient for him to do so. This makes a definitive assessment of his ideas difficult.
Furthermore, the mystery around him and his life is only deepened by the refusal of his heirs and estate to make his personal papers public. What motive exists for this secrecy? We can make an educated guess.
Noll uses what letters and papers are available (from Jung and his associates) to uncover the general outlines of a surprising story.
To give you the broad outline: Carl Jung believed that Christianity was disastrously imposed on Germanic peoples, who needed to revert to their pre-Christian religion to regain health individually and as a people. After having visions where he became a pagan God, Jung believed he was the prophet to lead this regressive religious movement.
The historical evidence for this viewpoint is presented thoroughly by Noll.
A few other controversies discussed in the book:
1. Jung socially damaged his cousin by diagnosing her as a hysteric in one of his first scientific papers
2. After a transformative encounter with Otto Gross (who is the originator of the introvert/extrovert personality types), Jung engaged in polygamy and actually recommended this practice to his male patients as therapeutic
3. Jung deliberately ignored alternative explanations for his scientific "discovery" of the collective unconscious, most notably cryptomnesia (when learned information is forgotten and then 'rediscovered' as an original idea)
4. Jung held antisemitic viewpoints and was potentially at some point a Nazi supporter
If you want more information about these allegations then it's worthwhile to read the book itself.
For myself, it was seriously surprising to find out how much of Jung's work is built on forgotten yet widely held turn of the century (1900) German views.
From the author (p. 264): "...his disciples have taken this cluster of uniquely German ideas and transmitted them around the world with absolutely no awareness of their origin in a specific historical context."
Furthermore, I did not really understand that psychological problems were considered incurable and heritable degeneracy prior to psychoanalysis. Having a mentally ill relative was a mark of undesirable illness in the entire family. This makes Freud and Jung look like humanists in comparison.
Overall this is a well-written historical book about a genius who undoubtedly contributed some important ideas (word association and personality types most notably), and clung to other ideas markedly less useful. Did he also found a cult (built off his understanding of ancient and pagan cults) that continues to this day? It's possible.
A final note: The Aryan Christ was published in 1997. Perhaps in response, Jung's "The Red Book" was published in 2009. It would be fascinating to hear Noll's opinion on this new source of information.
Here is what I will say: Carl Jung was secretive and misleading on purpose. Jung clearly knew that the ideas he was entertaining were controversial and he deliberately presented them differently when it was convenient for him to do so. This makes a definitive assessment of his ideas difficult.
Furthermore, the mystery around him and his life is only deepened by the refusal of his heirs and estate to make his personal papers public. What motive exists for this secrecy? We can make an educated guess.
Noll uses what letters and papers are available (from Jung and his associates) to uncover the general outlines of a surprising story.
To give you the broad outline: Carl Jung believed that Christianity was disastrously imposed on Germanic peoples, who needed to revert to their pre-Christian religion to regain health individually and as a people. After having visions where he became a pagan God, Jung believed he was the prophet to lead this regressive religious movement.
The historical evidence for this viewpoint is presented thoroughly by Noll.
A few other controversies discussed in the book:
1. Jung socially damaged his cousin by diagnosing her as a hysteric in one of his first scientific papers
2. After a transformative encounter with Otto Gross (who is the originator of the introvert/extrovert personality types), Jung engaged in polygamy and actually recommended this practice to his male patients as therapeutic
3. Jung deliberately ignored alternative explanations for his scientific "discovery" of the collective unconscious, most notably cryptomnesia (when learned information is forgotten and then 'rediscovered' as an original idea)
4. Jung held antisemitic viewpoints and was potentially at some point a Nazi supporter
If you want more information about these allegations then it's worthwhile to read the book itself.
For myself, it was seriously surprising to find out how much of Jung's work is built on forgotten yet widely held turn of the century (1900) German views.
From the author (p. 264): "...his disciples have taken this cluster of uniquely German ideas and transmitted them around the world with absolutely no awareness of their origin in a specific historical context."
Furthermore, I did not really understand that psychological problems were considered incurable and heritable degeneracy prior to psychoanalysis. Having a mentally ill relative was a mark of undesirable illness in the entire family. This makes Freud and Jung look like humanists in comparison.
Overall this is a well-written historical book about a genius who undoubtedly contributed some important ideas (word association and personality types most notably), and clung to other ideas markedly less useful. Did he also found a cult (built off his understanding of ancient and pagan cults) that continues to this day? It's possible.
A final note: The Aryan Christ was published in 1997. Perhaps in response, Jung's "The Red Book" was published in 2009. It would be fascinating to hear Noll's opinion on this new source of information.
November 19, 2022
Highlights the light & dark side of Jungs work. Has me intrigued to learn more about his theories while also leaving me a sense of caution in approaching his body of work… as Jung (at times) used his theories to rationalize his suspect life choices.
Planning on reading Memories, Dreams & Reflections with a grain of salt.
Planning on reading Memories, Dreams & Reflections with a grain of salt.
August 5, 2021
Not good.
Read
May 9, 2023Rating pending me having the confidence to finish the book...
February 15, 2025
Carl Jung engaged in pseudoscience (common knowledge at this point); that being said, this book is less of a comprehensive history and more a practice in lambasting the man.
August 30, 2025
An eye-opening account of Jung's paganism and volklish obsessions. Once again, the rule is confirmed: if you suspect a philosopher is esoteric, you're probably right.
February 14, 2011
relationships facts ! very important
August 31, 2011
The description of the intellectual atmosphere of the time is what I most valued in this book.
Displaying 1 - 19 of 19 reviews