Partisans of each faction tend to read publications of their co-believers while outsiders are largely ignored. Egyptology sometimes reminds one of the television chat shows where the hosts appear as guests on each other’s programmes in a kind of incestuous relationship based on the belief that there is no world outside their own. There is a tremendous gulf separating professional and amateur Egyptologists across which both sides view each other with suspicion. Andy Beckett, in the article which appeared in the Independent on Sunday on July 30, 1995, reported that scholars at the British Museum whom he had consulted hadn’t read the book nor heard of its author. The book has been a runaway hit with the public, but it hasn’t elicited much response from “orthodox” Egyptologists.
A discussion of myths referring to environmental catastrophes and mysterious “civilizer” figures from all over the world is followed by contemporary scientific evidence for natural disasters on comparable scale. Special attention is paid to the high standard of technology and mathematical and astronomical knowledge which, it is suggested, were purposefully embodied in some of the structures. AD to about 4000 BC, or Tiahuanaco from AD 500 to as early as 15,000-10,000 BC!). in the case of Machu Picchu from the 15th c. Intriguing monuments of South and Central America are examined and often daringly re-dated to periods much earlier than is generally believed (e.g. The book starts with a discussion of the remarkably detailed old maps of Antarctica (the continent which was only discovered in 1818), in particular the map drawn by Admiral Piri Reis in 1513.
256 onwards, and I shall summarize the preceding pages only briefly. Egyptian evidence is used extensively from p. 487-505) in order to find out where he or she is being taken. The reader may be well advised to turn first to Chapter 52 (pp.
Who saw that something was badly wrong with the history of mankind, who had the courage to speak out against intellectual adversity, and who pioneered the momentous paradigm shift that is now irrevocably under way.įine words, but are they justified and should they be taken seriously? Schwaller de Lubicz, Charles Hapgood and Giorgio de Santillana: Discussions in Egyptology 34, 1996, pp135 – 142Įven before we have a chance to read the first sentence of his new block-buster, Graham Hancock declares his opposition to traditional scholarship when he pays tribute to Ignatius Donnelly, Arthur Posnansky, R.A.
0 kommentar(er)
