What do you think?
Rate this book
Las huellas de los dioses: La evidencia sobre la civilización perdida de la Tierra
Not yet published
Expected 2 Jun 26Es posible que la historia de la humanidad se remonte mucho más atrás en el tiempo de lo que creíamos? Mediante el uso de herramientas tan variadas como la arqueoastronomía, la geología y el análisis informático de mitos antiguos, Graham Hancock presenta argumentos convincentes para sugerir que sí lo es.
En Las huellas de los dioses, Hancock se embarca en una búsqueda por todo el mundo para reunir las piezas del vasto y fascinante rompecabezas del pasado oculto de la humanidad. Monumentos antiguos y tan distantes entre sí como la Gran Esfinge de Egipto, las extrañas ruinas andinas de Tihuanaco y los sobrecogedores Templos del Sol y de la Luna de México, revelan no solo las claras huellas dactilares cde una civilización aún no identificada de la más remota antigüedad, sino también sorprendentes pruebas de su enorme sofisticación, sus avances tecnológicos y sus evolucionados conocimientos científicos.
Y algo más. A medida que descubrimos la verdad sobre la prehistoria y conocemos el verdadero significado de los antiguos mitos y monumentos que aún siguen en pie en todo el mundo, resulta evidente que se trata de advertencias sobre un terrible cataclismo que afecta a la Tierra en grandes ciclos a intervalos irregulares de tiempo… y que podría estar a punto de repetirse.
En Las huellas de los dioses, Hancock se embarca en una búsqueda por todo el mundo para reunir las piezas del vasto y fascinante rompecabezas del pasado oculto de la humanidad. Monumentos antiguos y tan distantes entre sí como la Gran Esfinge de Egipto, las extrañas ruinas andinas de Tihuanaco y los sobrecogedores Templos del Sol y de la Luna de México, revelan no solo las claras huellas dactilares cde una civilización aún no identificada de la más remota antigüedad, sino también sorprendentes pruebas de su enorme sofisticación, sus avances tecnológicos y sus evolucionados conocimientos científicos.
Y algo más. A medida que descubrimos la verdad sobre la prehistoria y conocemos el verdadero significado de los antiguos mitos y monumentos que aún siguen en pie en todo el mundo, resulta evidente que se trata de advertencias sobre un terrible cataclismo que afecta a la Tierra en grandes ciclos a intervalos irregulares de tiempo… y que podría estar a punto de repetirse.
672 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1995
4439 people are currently reading
31036 people want to read
About the author
Graham Hancock
126 books4,104 followersGraham Hancock is a British writer and journalist. His books include Lords of Poverty, The Sign and the Seal, Fingerprints of the Gods, Keeper of Genesis (released in the US as Message of the Sphinx), The Mars Mystery, Heaven's Mirror (with wife Santha Faiia), Underworld: The Mysterious Origins of Civilization, Talisman: Sacred Cities, Secret Faith (with co-author Robert Bauval), Supernatural: Meeting with the Ancient Teachers of Mankind and Magicians of the Gods. He also wrote and presented the Channel 4 documentaries Underworld: Flooded Kingdoms of the Ice Age and Quest for the Lost Civilisation. His first novel, Entangled, was published in 2010.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 1,149 reviews
April 20, 2023
Now for what started out as a stream-of-consciousness criticism of Graham Hancock.
While Erich Von Daniken (the OG Ancient Aliens guy) is immediately and overtly goofy, Hancock is relatively more subtle. Having meandered through a decent portion of "Isis Unveiled" a year or two ago, I found some commonalities between Hancock and the old Theosophists like Madame Blavatsky. Not only do they hope to convince their readers through a doorstop of a volume filled with dubious facts and poor analysis, but they have that belief that humans of the most remote ancient times were far more advanced than we give them credit for--which, interestingly, is in opposition to the Ancient Aliens folks, who believe that ancient humans were far too simple to create anything on their own.
So how has Hancock carved out his particular niche in this genre? While he does often flirt with woo-woo (he entertains the idea of the Pyramid stones being lifted by telepathy, for example), Hancock isn't one of those Ancient Aliens buffoons who go looking for helicopters and light bulbs in ancient Egyptian hieroglyphics. Compared to other pseudoarchaeological works, Hancock's ideas are "grounded." Yet he wholesale engages in what is essentially a "God of the gaps" approach against orthodox archaeology, focusing on sites of extreme antiquity like Tiwanaku, the Great Sphinx, the Great Pyramids, etc. where comprehensive knowledge of exactly how these monumental works were created happens to be scant. And what's lodged in every gap, according to Hancock? Evidence for a globe-spanning, ten-thousand year old civilization which modern archaeologists and historians have refused to acknowledge for decades because they're a blind, malicious intellectual junta.
Indeed, what I see as one of Hancock's major failings is ironically the flip-side of what he sees as the failings of archaeologists. They, along with most other scientists, are specific subject-matter experts who aren't necessarily as well-versed in astronomy, geology, astrology, drug use, etc. But Hancock is on the extreme other end of the spectrum in terms of generalism vs specialism. Just like the ancient alien folks, he dances from site to site across the globe, failing to engage with the complex context (zillions of incredibly mundane potsherds, village sites, and artifacts whose photos wouldn't sell books) which provides us with the world history chronology we have today. He cherry picks evidence in order to fit his preconceived notions of a Neolithic global civilization brought low by catastrophe. This leads to, among other things, a deluge of flimsy, generic parallels drawn between the Old Kingdom Ancient Egyptians of around 2500 BC, for example, and Mesoamerican cultures who lived up to 3,000 years after them--all to explain why both civilizations built pyramids. It's like saying that because the ancient Greeks depict dogs on black figure pottery, and because the SPCA depicted dogs in all of those TV advertisements about animal cruelty back in the 2000s with a Sarah McLachlan song in the background, there must have been an antediluvian civilization which directly inspired the ancient Greeks to put dogs on their ceramics, and inspired Sarah McLachlan to write "In the Arms of An Angel."
So--the book itself. On my first attempt, I read only about eighty pages of it because of how dishonestly Hancock presents his case studies. He does absolutely zero justice to the orthodox explanations for his case studies such as the Piri Reis map (ignoring such explanations as much as he mischaracterizes them), so in order to actually get an accurate view of why the archaeological community (or society writ large) mysteriously doesn't believe the seemingly-logical statements Hancock has put forth, you need to go beyond Hancock's constant flippant descriptions of the orthodox archaeological community being some sort of modern-day Spanish Inquisition, and actually know what the context of these case studies is. For me, that meant having dozens of internet tabs and scholarly articles open while listening to a naively-enraptured Joe Rogan lapping this stuff up on his podcast. Suffice to say, I could only stomach so much of this before the irritation at Hancock's one-sided accounts of archaeological sites trumped the will to continue. Once you start actually double-checking this stuff, you start to feel much less like Hancock is approaching archaeology from a fresh new point of view, and more that you are being deceived. It is curious how Hancock often combats accusations of pseudoscience by stating that he is not a scientist--and yet he fills his books with tons of footnotes and complains about close-mindedness and conspiracy among orthodox archaeologists, two tools that make him seem like a rebellious alternative to orthodox scientific scrutiny. It's kinda like when Alex Jones assumes the aesthetical trappings of a sort of rebel-journalist, with his map background behind him, desk, etc. etc., but collapses when compared to even the modern-day (ie, "low") standards of journalistic integrity.
I have recently succeeded at finishing reading the book upon a second attempt, having created an impromptu book club with some friends of mine who are not historians and thus certainly more "open-minded" than I. Our conclusions were surprising. The Piri Reis map stuff in the beginning of the book, which put me off of the first reading, is probably the "strongest" portion of the book. What occurs thereafter is a travelogue (his sole, weak claim to authority on these subjects is by personally visiting the sites--a claim which could be shared with thousands of other tourists every year), accompanied by grotesque instances of supposition, misrepresentation, and obfuscation. Indeed, my friends started to lose interest in similar fashion to me during my first attempt. They were intrigued-but-disbelieving of Hancock's maps section which is the first part of the book, but once the travelogue began in earnest, they started noting a marked increase of logical fallacies and deceptions. After a couple hundred pages of this, the bullshit started becoming pedestrian, and distrust of the author suffocated much interest in continuing. I finished it, with the final hundred pages being pure torture, while both of my friends refused to devote more time to it and finish it. Suffice to say, the book is a bunch of hot garbage, and those who defend it, or state that it "survives their rigorous scrutiny," should be embarrassed. You don't even need access to a college library to see that Hancock is being unscrupulous-even cursory Wikipedia searches cast doubt on many of Hancock's statements, often by merely exhibiting how much information he is conveniently omitting.
This book has a pretty fantastic rating here on Goodreads overall, which is as disappointing as it is unsurprising. I've often thought that there is some real hubris to those who unhesitantingly buy into, and champion, pseudoarchaeological or pseudohistorical works. I cannot help but imagine a group of people who always thought "mundane" history was boring when they were in grade school. Perhaps they had a poor social studies teacher or two. But then they come upon alternative theories that are far more interesting than the established orthodox views. Theories that allow them to think that not only do they rival the intelligence and education of the necktie-wearing stiffs up in the ivory towers of the college campuses--they surpass them in open-mindedness. Thorough knowledge of any part of the traditional historical context for the last 5000 years is not necessary as long as one can pretend that they're some sort of tragic brilliant Galileo figure against The Sheeple or The Establishment, man. They can't distinguish Corinth from Thebes, or Herodotus from Diodorus Siculus, but they'll be happy to tell you all about the Antikythera mechanism, because they get off on the trappings of having esoteric wisdom. They're only interested in ancient history inasmuch as their cult leaders relay it to them with a counter-cultural veneer. I've seen similar tendencies among ancient aliens fanatics. They'll state with wide-eyed confidence that Alexander the Great's army saw a UFO during the siege of Tyre in 332 BC, despite utter ignorance in regards to what else Alexander the Great did, where Tyre is, what role either of them played throughout history, what the scholarly sources are for that time period,how reliable they may or may not be, etc etc.
So there we are. Fingerprints of the Gods. The warning signs were there from the beginning, when Hancock spent 30 pages of talking about the Piri Reis map using Charles Hapgood as a sole source, and described him as one of those aforementioned tragic Galileo types, rather than presenting the opposing views and explaining to his readers why this concept is not accepted by the mainstream. Combine that with a cringe-inducing look at his list of current works, including a book about the Face on Mars (whose existence has since been emphatically debunked), and one struggles to avoid seeing a snake-oil salesman. I can't speak for his other works, but in this book, he borders on the peddling of deceit--and if you honestly think that the only thing stopping the vast majority of people from believing Hancock's theories is some sort of bitter, jealous academic cabal, you've been hoodwinked.
EDIT
This book review tackled Hancock's work on a broad level out of necessity. If you're interested in a case study of why his analysis is dubious, I present a summation of my notes on the Piri Reis and Oronteus Finaeus maps:
The Piri Reis and the Oronteus Finaeus maps (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piri_Re..., https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi... ) are presented by Hancock as maps that were influenced by "ancient knowledge" from prehistory to explain why he believes that the coast of Antarctica under the polar ice (as well as the Bimini Road) is being portrayed on said maps. In other words, he thinks that this is information that has been successfully conveyed from his Atlantis of 12,000 years ago and survived through ancient records to the 16th century. Never mind that the Piri Reis map has no idea what North America or the southern coast of South America looks like. Never mind that the Turkish text on the map is filled with references to the Spanish, Genoese, and Portuguese explorations, and that the Atlantic coastline is inspired by their findings.
Never mind that the map is full of monsters and strange creatures typical of depictions of a terra incognita. Never mind that the island Hancock thinks is an Ice Age Bahama/Bimini island could just as easily be Cuba, Hispaniola, or Puerto Rico (particularly the latter two, given the identification of the nearby Virgin Islands in Turkish). Never mind that it would be absurd for ancient people to build a gigantic road lengthwise on a small island instead of just using ships for navigation (as they did in ancient times).
Never mind that on the Oronteus Finaeus map, the Latin says TERRA AUSTRALIS RE center inventa sed nondum plene cognita, which means "Southern Land recently discovered but not yet completely known," and that tons of medieval maps put fictional Terrae Australes of various sizes and proportions at the bottom of the southern hemisphere due to the Aristotelian idea of providing "balance" to the world (for similar reasons, we see that the North Pole has four rivers on many such maps). Never mind that the REGIO PATALIS on the Terra Australis of the Oronteus Finaeus map is common to maps of the Middle Ages and early modern period, and although it originally referred to an area in India at the mouth of the Indus, later map makers had no idea where it was and pushed it further and further out into terrae incognitae.
Never mind that the Piri Reis map specifically states that its earliest maps only go back to the days of Alexander the Great (ie 4th century BCE) and specifically were used for "the inhabited quarter of the world." Never mind the implications of that being that the maps are not nearly as ancient as Hancock claims, and that they were only utilized for the Old World. Never mind that we actually have several descriptions of maps from antiquity, none of which include the Antarctic coastline or American coastline (some examples are here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_w...).
Never mind all these things. Hancock won't even bring these obvious issues up and then try to refute them in his books. Because again, he is cherry picking evidence to fit his theory. All he does in Fingerprints of the Gods is cite Charles Hapgood as a sole source and characterize him as a tragic brilliant maligned Galileo figure mistreated by dogmatic academics, as he does for everyone who agrees with his wild theories (including himself). This is why he's untrustworthy as a writer and researcher.
While Erich Von Daniken (the OG Ancient Aliens guy) is immediately and overtly goofy, Hancock is relatively more subtle. Having meandered through a decent portion of "Isis Unveiled" a year or two ago, I found some commonalities between Hancock and the old Theosophists like Madame Blavatsky. Not only do they hope to convince their readers through a doorstop of a volume filled with dubious facts and poor analysis, but they have that belief that humans of the most remote ancient times were far more advanced than we give them credit for--which, interestingly, is in opposition to the Ancient Aliens folks, who believe that ancient humans were far too simple to create anything on their own.
So how has Hancock carved out his particular niche in this genre? While he does often flirt with woo-woo (he entertains the idea of the Pyramid stones being lifted by telepathy, for example), Hancock isn't one of those Ancient Aliens buffoons who go looking for helicopters and light bulbs in ancient Egyptian hieroglyphics. Compared to other pseudoarchaeological works, Hancock's ideas are "grounded." Yet he wholesale engages in what is essentially a "God of the gaps" approach against orthodox archaeology, focusing on sites of extreme antiquity like Tiwanaku, the Great Sphinx, the Great Pyramids, etc. where comprehensive knowledge of exactly how these monumental works were created happens to be scant. And what's lodged in every gap, according to Hancock? Evidence for a globe-spanning, ten-thousand year old civilization which modern archaeologists and historians have refused to acknowledge for decades because they're a blind, malicious intellectual junta.
Indeed, what I see as one of Hancock's major failings is ironically the flip-side of what he sees as the failings of archaeologists. They, along with most other scientists, are specific subject-matter experts who aren't necessarily as well-versed in astronomy, geology, astrology, drug use, etc. But Hancock is on the extreme other end of the spectrum in terms of generalism vs specialism. Just like the ancient alien folks, he dances from site to site across the globe, failing to engage with the complex context (zillions of incredibly mundane potsherds, village sites, and artifacts whose photos wouldn't sell books) which provides us with the world history chronology we have today. He cherry picks evidence in order to fit his preconceived notions of a Neolithic global civilization brought low by catastrophe. This leads to, among other things, a deluge of flimsy, generic parallels drawn between the Old Kingdom Ancient Egyptians of around 2500 BC, for example, and Mesoamerican cultures who lived up to 3,000 years after them--all to explain why both civilizations built pyramids. It's like saying that because the ancient Greeks depict dogs on black figure pottery, and because the SPCA depicted dogs in all of those TV advertisements about animal cruelty back in the 2000s with a Sarah McLachlan song in the background, there must have been an antediluvian civilization which directly inspired the ancient Greeks to put dogs on their ceramics, and inspired Sarah McLachlan to write "In the Arms of An Angel."
So--the book itself. On my first attempt, I read only about eighty pages of it because of how dishonestly Hancock presents his case studies. He does absolutely zero justice to the orthodox explanations for his case studies such as the Piri Reis map (ignoring such explanations as much as he mischaracterizes them), so in order to actually get an accurate view of why the archaeological community (or society writ large) mysteriously doesn't believe the seemingly-logical statements Hancock has put forth, you need to go beyond Hancock's constant flippant descriptions of the orthodox archaeological community being some sort of modern-day Spanish Inquisition, and actually know what the context of these case studies is. For me, that meant having dozens of internet tabs and scholarly articles open while listening to a naively-enraptured Joe Rogan lapping this stuff up on his podcast. Suffice to say, I could only stomach so much of this before the irritation at Hancock's one-sided accounts of archaeological sites trumped the will to continue. Once you start actually double-checking this stuff, you start to feel much less like Hancock is approaching archaeology from a fresh new point of view, and more that you are being deceived. It is curious how Hancock often combats accusations of pseudoscience by stating that he is not a scientist--and yet he fills his books with tons of footnotes and complains about close-mindedness and conspiracy among orthodox archaeologists, two tools that make him seem like a rebellious alternative to orthodox scientific scrutiny. It's kinda like when Alex Jones assumes the aesthetical trappings of a sort of rebel-journalist, with his map background behind him, desk, etc. etc., but collapses when compared to even the modern-day (ie, "low") standards of journalistic integrity.
I have recently succeeded at finishing reading the book upon a second attempt, having created an impromptu book club with some friends of mine who are not historians and thus certainly more "open-minded" than I. Our conclusions were surprising. The Piri Reis map stuff in the beginning of the book, which put me off of the first reading, is probably the "strongest" portion of the book. What occurs thereafter is a travelogue (his sole, weak claim to authority on these subjects is by personally visiting the sites--a claim which could be shared with thousands of other tourists every year), accompanied by grotesque instances of supposition, misrepresentation, and obfuscation. Indeed, my friends started to lose interest in similar fashion to me during my first attempt. They were intrigued-but-disbelieving of Hancock's maps section which is the first part of the book, but once the travelogue began in earnest, they started noting a marked increase of logical fallacies and deceptions. After a couple hundred pages of this, the bullshit started becoming pedestrian, and distrust of the author suffocated much interest in continuing. I finished it, with the final hundred pages being pure torture, while both of my friends refused to devote more time to it and finish it. Suffice to say, the book is a bunch of hot garbage, and those who defend it, or state that it "survives their rigorous scrutiny," should be embarrassed. You don't even need access to a college library to see that Hancock is being unscrupulous-even cursory Wikipedia searches cast doubt on many of Hancock's statements, often by merely exhibiting how much information he is conveniently omitting.
This book has a pretty fantastic rating here on Goodreads overall, which is as disappointing as it is unsurprising. I've often thought that there is some real hubris to those who unhesitantingly buy into, and champion, pseudoarchaeological or pseudohistorical works. I cannot help but imagine a group of people who always thought "mundane" history was boring when they were in grade school. Perhaps they had a poor social studies teacher or two. But then they come upon alternative theories that are far more interesting than the established orthodox views. Theories that allow them to think that not only do they rival the intelligence and education of the necktie-wearing stiffs up in the ivory towers of the college campuses--they surpass them in open-mindedness. Thorough knowledge of any part of the traditional historical context for the last 5000 years is not necessary as long as one can pretend that they're some sort of tragic brilliant Galileo figure against The Sheeple or The Establishment, man. They can't distinguish Corinth from Thebes, or Herodotus from Diodorus Siculus, but they'll be happy to tell you all about the Antikythera mechanism, because they get off on the trappings of having esoteric wisdom. They're only interested in ancient history inasmuch as their cult leaders relay it to them with a counter-cultural veneer. I've seen similar tendencies among ancient aliens fanatics. They'll state with wide-eyed confidence that Alexander the Great's army saw a UFO during the siege of Tyre in 332 BC, despite utter ignorance in regards to what else Alexander the Great did, where Tyre is, what role either of them played throughout history, what the scholarly sources are for that time period,how reliable they may or may not be, etc etc.
So there we are. Fingerprints of the Gods. The warning signs were there from the beginning, when Hancock spent 30 pages of talking about the Piri Reis map using Charles Hapgood as a sole source, and described him as one of those aforementioned tragic Galileo types, rather than presenting the opposing views and explaining to his readers why this concept is not accepted by the mainstream. Combine that with a cringe-inducing look at his list of current works, including a book about the Face on Mars (whose existence has since been emphatically debunked), and one struggles to avoid seeing a snake-oil salesman. I can't speak for his other works, but in this book, he borders on the peddling of deceit--and if you honestly think that the only thing stopping the vast majority of people from believing Hancock's theories is some sort of bitter, jealous academic cabal, you've been hoodwinked.
EDIT
This book review tackled Hancock's work on a broad level out of necessity. If you're interested in a case study of why his analysis is dubious, I present a summation of my notes on the Piri Reis and Oronteus Finaeus maps:
The Piri Reis and the Oronteus Finaeus maps (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piri_Re..., https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi... ) are presented by Hancock as maps that were influenced by "ancient knowledge" from prehistory to explain why he believes that the coast of Antarctica under the polar ice (as well as the Bimini Road) is being portrayed on said maps. In other words, he thinks that this is information that has been successfully conveyed from his Atlantis of 12,000 years ago and survived through ancient records to the 16th century. Never mind that the Piri Reis map has no idea what North America or the southern coast of South America looks like. Never mind that the Turkish text on the map is filled with references to the Spanish, Genoese, and Portuguese explorations, and that the Atlantic coastline is inspired by their findings.
Never mind that the map is full of monsters and strange creatures typical of depictions of a terra incognita. Never mind that the island Hancock thinks is an Ice Age Bahama/Bimini island could just as easily be Cuba, Hispaniola, or Puerto Rico (particularly the latter two, given the identification of the nearby Virgin Islands in Turkish). Never mind that it would be absurd for ancient people to build a gigantic road lengthwise on a small island instead of just using ships for navigation (as they did in ancient times).
Never mind that on the Oronteus Finaeus map, the Latin says TERRA AUSTRALIS RE center inventa sed nondum plene cognita, which means "Southern Land recently discovered but not yet completely known," and that tons of medieval maps put fictional Terrae Australes of various sizes and proportions at the bottom of the southern hemisphere due to the Aristotelian idea of providing "balance" to the world (for similar reasons, we see that the North Pole has four rivers on many such maps). Never mind that the REGIO PATALIS on the Terra Australis of the Oronteus Finaeus map is common to maps of the Middle Ages and early modern period, and although it originally referred to an area in India at the mouth of the Indus, later map makers had no idea where it was and pushed it further and further out into terrae incognitae.
Never mind that the Piri Reis map specifically states that its earliest maps only go back to the days of Alexander the Great (ie 4th century BCE) and specifically were used for "the inhabited quarter of the world." Never mind the implications of that being that the maps are not nearly as ancient as Hancock claims, and that they were only utilized for the Old World. Never mind that we actually have several descriptions of maps from antiquity, none of which include the Antarctic coastline or American coastline (some examples are here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_w...).
Never mind all these things. Hancock won't even bring these obvious issues up and then try to refute them in his books. Because again, he is cherry picking evidence to fit his theory. All he does in Fingerprints of the Gods is cite Charles Hapgood as a sole source and characterize him as a tragic brilliant maligned Galileo figure mistreated by dogmatic academics, as he does for everyone who agrees with his wild theories (including himself). This is why he's untrustworthy as a writer and researcher.
December 1, 2008
I am willing to admit that I am a huge fan of alternative histories/unorthodox scientific explanations. This text falls into the general category that your average reader is going to label as 'conspiracy theory.' It is also likely that you have run into someone during your life who reads "conspiracy theories' and buys them hook line and sinker. What people forget, is that Science, History, in fact all scholastic inquiry, is a conversation of published works proposing advances in research for other scholars to review and appraise. When the scholarly gestalt becomes so entrenched in the official HISTORY that they are no longer willing to entertain well-researched radical hypothesis then they become institutional hypocrites.
Reader, please remember that the Academy provides one side of the story and someone else (most certainly disowned or under respected by the status quo) will provide another side of the coin. Chances are that the image of a coin is a terribly deficient symbol to accurately represent the various reasonable hypothesis for any given scholarly subject. Fingerprints of the Gods is one face on the cubic representation of the study of pre-history.
Read the book; I implore you, and keep an open mind. Hancock's diction flows in a friendly and inviting manner. The research proceeds with the pace and encouragement of a ninth grade literature classic. This text offers an exciting summary of years of research into the past. Read the book, even if you don't agree, at least you can support your opinion with the information that on occasion you are willing to entertain radical notions.
Reader, please remember that the Academy provides one side of the story and someone else (most certainly disowned or under respected by the status quo) will provide another side of the coin. Chances are that the image of a coin is a terribly deficient symbol to accurately represent the various reasonable hypothesis for any given scholarly subject. Fingerprints of the Gods is one face on the cubic representation of the study of pre-history.
Read the book; I implore you, and keep an open mind. Hancock's diction flows in a friendly and inviting manner. The research proceeds with the pace and encouragement of a ninth grade literature classic. This text offers an exciting summary of years of research into the past. Read the book, even if you don't agree, at least you can support your opinion with the information that on occasion you are willing to entertain radical notions.
April 4, 2017
So a little background, I have always been obsessed with unexplained phenomena. As a 10 year-old boy, I would walk to the public library and check out multiple books on the Loch Ness Monster, Sasquatch, The Pyramids, Easter Island, etc.... It was just ingrained in me that if there was a TV show on about these types of things, or a book that just came out, I was all over it. There's my starting point. Lately, this stuff has been extremely in-style with the popularity of shows like Ancient Aliens. So believe me, I get it and I love it. Graham Hancock is a guy that comes across as one of the more measured and if you will "less crazy" purveyors of ancient phenomena. Everybody knows Giorgio Tsoukalos because of the crazy hair and the bombastic statements. Hancock is sort of the professorial-looking dude who actually looks and sounds like he knows what he's talking about. So it was with great pleasure that I came across Fingerprints of the Gods. It is a book that has been out for some 20 odd years but I never got around to checking it out. Well all I will say is that if you love finding out a lot about the ruins of Machu Pichu, the mysterious Nazca Lines of Peru, how Antarctica was at one time not covered with ice and mapped out this way by explorers as recently as 600 years ago, the ancient pyramids of Giza, Easter Island, etc.... then you need to read this book. Hancock does a great job of presenting his theories while never portraying them as the only definitive answer. I had a lot of fun reading each chapter and then going online to "fact-check" what Graham had just presented. Of course the orthodox historians had perfectly reasonable explanations and also more believable ones, but it was very entertaining to compare the two schools of thought. I'm not naive, I know that Hancock's theories are simply to spark the imagination and most-likely pretty far from the actual truth. This doesn't mean that I didn't get a heck of a lot of enjoyment out of reading Fingerprints of the Gods though. Just take it with a grain of salt. But if you are into this kind of thing, this is about as good as it gets. I'm looking forward to reading the sequel Magicians of the Gods.
January 28, 2016
I am, I'm afraid, a non-believer. Hancock is an excellent wordsmith, but his theories are akin to my grandmother's understanding of smart phones: they ramble on and on, occasionally sound good when one piece is sorta right, but in sum just a total mess of uncertain logic based on really shoddy premises. Case in point: in one book, Hancock cites a single ambiguous line in the medieval romance Parsifal as a key source of evidence that the Knights Templar took the Holy Grail to Africa.
So there are numerous problems with Hancock's theories, but this is to be expected with alternative historians. My real beef with him is that he writes well enough to actually be persuasive to someone who is not very familiar with the subject. As a history major now in medical school, I find the spread of misinformation abhorrent, as I believe it to be damaging not only to individual critical thinking skills and the historical corpus, but also a source of prejudice, racial superiority, and scare-mongering.
So there are numerous problems with Hancock's theories, but this is to be expected with alternative historians. My real beef with him is that he writes well enough to actually be persuasive to someone who is not very familiar with the subject. As a history major now in medical school, I find the spread of misinformation abhorrent, as I believe it to be damaging not only to individual critical thinking skills and the historical corpus, but also a source of prejudice, racial superiority, and scare-mongering.
February 22, 2009
It's worth reading the science skeptic reviews on this book.
For me, it passes the science test, and for open minded types who are interested in alternate historical explanations that don't require aliens or other deus ex machina to explain some unexplainables, this is a special treat.
My main issues with this book are its excessive length due to the intermittent travelogue, and the heavy amount of repetition.
The basic thesis is that the pyramids (and other megalithic structures around the world) were built earlier than conventional wisdom supposes, probably around 10,450 BC, and here is where the skeptics really get tweaked, because we MUST know more than any other humans previously, that there was a technologically advanced civilization around then which built them. To me this is a no brainer-- contemporary still can't duplicate some of those engineering feats, so however they got there it's some way we can't figure out.
(Hancock says) this advanced civilization was destroyed by the periodic catastrophic events around ice ages.
There is a lot more to it, but the basic concept is pretty sound, and it's enjoyable reading the support for it, as well as his speculations about what are obviously a lot more details.
===> update. It's been two days since I finished it and I keep thinking about it. This book has the virtue of presenting you with a lot of information that contradicts status quo ideas about the past. Hancock makes his interpretation, but he isn't ultra dogmatic about it. All those wacky tidbits of information (accurate maps of the topography of antarctica, which has been under an ice sheet for thousands of years) are still churning around in my head and making new interesting patterns.
The point being, there is food for thought here. The stuff you don't hear about from regular sources because it does not support regular theories. An uncertainty about what the actual interpretation of this data might be which invites you to make your own.
andnow, an observation about the goodreads rankings. This book has a lower rating than Flower of Life by Drunvalo Melchizedek. Of course one must take writing style into account, but it is now clear to me that books are ranked by the people who read (and feel like ranking) them. I theorize that people with a greater preference for the default view of history are liklier to read this book than flower of life. And that they may find it too far beyond their views for their liking. Where to read Flower of Life, which bases its story of ancient civilizations on far far far less actual data, and tells the reader how it is rather than inviting the reader along on a voyage of discovery and interpretation. OTOH, this book is twice as long, so maybe that has something to do with it ;-)
For me, it passes the science test, and for open minded types who are interested in alternate historical explanations that don't require aliens or other deus ex machina to explain some unexplainables, this is a special treat.
My main issues with this book are its excessive length due to the intermittent travelogue, and the heavy amount of repetition.
The basic thesis is that the pyramids (and other megalithic structures around the world) were built earlier than conventional wisdom supposes, probably around 10,450 BC, and here is where the skeptics really get tweaked, because we MUST know more than any other humans previously, that there was a technologically advanced civilization around then which built them. To me this is a no brainer-- contemporary still can't duplicate some of those engineering feats, so however they got there it's some way we can't figure out.
(Hancock says) this advanced civilization was destroyed by the periodic catastrophic events around ice ages.
There is a lot more to it, but the basic concept is pretty sound, and it's enjoyable reading the support for it, as well as his speculations about what are obviously a lot more details.
===> update. It's been two days since I finished it and I keep thinking about it. This book has the virtue of presenting you with a lot of information that contradicts status quo ideas about the past. Hancock makes his interpretation, but he isn't ultra dogmatic about it. All those wacky tidbits of information (accurate maps of the topography of antarctica, which has been under an ice sheet for thousands of years) are still churning around in my head and making new interesting patterns.
The point being, there is food for thought here. The stuff you don't hear about from regular sources because it does not support regular theories. An uncertainty about what the actual interpretation of this data might be which invites you to make your own.
andnow, an observation about the goodreads rankings. This book has a lower rating than Flower of Life by Drunvalo Melchizedek. Of course one must take writing style into account, but it is now clear to me that books are ranked by the people who read (and feel like ranking) them. I theorize that people with a greater preference for the default view of history are liklier to read this book than flower of life. And that they may find it too far beyond their views for their liking. Where to read Flower of Life, which bases its story of ancient civilizations on far far far less actual data, and tells the reader how it is rather than inviting the reader along on a voyage of discovery and interpretation. OTOH, this book is twice as long, so maybe that has something to do with it ;-)
February 26, 2019
A seismographic expedition to Antarctica in 1949 first established its detailed land coastline – not the ice cap, which itself lay undiscovered until 1820. So far as we know, the ice cap has been there for at least 6,000 years. Now, what would you say to the claim that the accurate land coastline of Antarctica appears on a map drawn in 1513? It’s true. Known by its author, the Piri Reis Map is not a hoax and has been well known from its origin. Amazingly, several other maps exist showing accurate coastlines that were not “discovered” until hundreds of years after the maps were drawn. But just focus on the Piri Reis Map. You have to assume it was taken from pre-existing maps or drawings. Who from 6,000 years ago, when the land surface of Antarctica was last visible, would have had the need, the inclination, or the ability to map it?
Here’s another one. Without lifting the pen from the paper, draw a hummingbird using one continuous line. Or a monkey. Or any of eighteen different birds, and other animals. Be sure you make it artistic, and that the pictured animal is unmistakable. Oh, and do it blindfolded. That’s what the Nazca people did in the Peruvian desert at least 1,600 years ago. They could not see the gigantic outlines they were drawing, but they did it.
Or take the stones in the walls at Machu Picchu. They are fitted so tightly without mortar you can’t slide paper between them and some have as many as thirty angles. Some are so massive they weigh nearly forty tons. And yet the Inca who moved them did not have use of the wheel. But never mind, no equipment existed anywhere else in the world in the 1,400's to move them up the virtually unnavigable mountain ridges to the site. And if that’s not enough for you, consider the stones at Cuzco, some weighing hundreds of tons, and worked in such detail that Spaniards thought demons, not humans, made them.
Where did the Maya get the zero, and place-keeping mathematics? And how did they correctly calculate the length of a year and the lunar month to within four decimal places of accuracy?
How about this: the Aymara language, spoken by Indians near Lake Titicaca and believed by some linguists to be the oldest in the world, is possibly “made up.” Its syntax is so stratified and rigid that it can be converted to an algorithm and because of this Aymara is a bridge language. Any language can be translated first into Aymara and then readily converted into any other language.
From another part of the world, perhaps you’ve thought about the engineering of the Great Pyramid. They had to precisely place one block weighing a minimum of 2.5 tons every two minutes working ten hours a day, 365 days a year, to complete it in twenty years as Egyptologists currently estimate, and end up with the apex exactly over the center of the base. Assuming you can envision the physical process for that, how do you coordinate the efforts of all the people involved, without radio or telecommunications? And why would they, without any doubt, have aligned the three Giza pyramids with the position of the stars in Orion’s belt as they were situated 12,000 years ago?
The author pieces these and dozens of other anomalies into a coherent picture. He compellingly suggests that a currently unknown past civilization possessed the necessary technical and cultural skills to have created these things and how that civilization disappeared. You come away certain that’s the only thing – aside from aliens and gods – that explains all of it. Fascinating.
Here’s another one. Without lifting the pen from the paper, draw a hummingbird using one continuous line. Or a monkey. Or any of eighteen different birds, and other animals. Be sure you make it artistic, and that the pictured animal is unmistakable. Oh, and do it blindfolded. That’s what the Nazca people did in the Peruvian desert at least 1,600 years ago. They could not see the gigantic outlines they were drawing, but they did it.
Or take the stones in the walls at Machu Picchu. They are fitted so tightly without mortar you can’t slide paper between them and some have as many as thirty angles. Some are so massive they weigh nearly forty tons. And yet the Inca who moved them did not have use of the wheel. But never mind, no equipment existed anywhere else in the world in the 1,400's to move them up the virtually unnavigable mountain ridges to the site. And if that’s not enough for you, consider the stones at Cuzco, some weighing hundreds of tons, and worked in such detail that Spaniards thought demons, not humans, made them.
Where did the Maya get the zero, and place-keeping mathematics? And how did they correctly calculate the length of a year and the lunar month to within four decimal places of accuracy?
How about this: the Aymara language, spoken by Indians near Lake Titicaca and believed by some linguists to be the oldest in the world, is possibly “made up.” Its syntax is so stratified and rigid that it can be converted to an algorithm and because of this Aymara is a bridge language. Any language can be translated first into Aymara and then readily converted into any other language.
From another part of the world, perhaps you’ve thought about the engineering of the Great Pyramid. They had to precisely place one block weighing a minimum of 2.5 tons every two minutes working ten hours a day, 365 days a year, to complete it in twenty years as Egyptologists currently estimate, and end up with the apex exactly over the center of the base. Assuming you can envision the physical process for that, how do you coordinate the efforts of all the people involved, without radio or telecommunications? And why would they, without any doubt, have aligned the three Giza pyramids with the position of the stars in Orion’s belt as they were situated 12,000 years ago?
The author pieces these and dozens of other anomalies into a coherent picture. He compellingly suggests that a currently unknown past civilization possessed the necessary technical and cultural skills to have created these things and how that civilization disappeared. You come away certain that’s the only thing – aside from aliens and gods – that explains all of it. Fascinating.
March 2, 2017
I’ve always been fascinated by prehistoric man – that is, man’s ancient history that precedes written records. It’s striking that, in our present form, human beings have been around for at least 75,000 years, but our written record and thus our best connection to the past only goes back a little over 5,000 years. Beyond those dates we have to rely on whatever our ancestors left behind – their trash, their tools, their settlements, and their mythologies.
I don’t think I’d ever have bought Fingerprints of the Gods on my own, but it was given to me as a gift by family who know I’m interested in history. And I’ll admit, while skeptical, I was intrigued. The reason for my amusement was because Fingerprints is a detailed narrative about a journalists’ search for evidence of an ancient civilization lost to history, that, in his view, pre-dated the Egyptians by thousands of years and achieved a level of technological and scientific advancement not matched until our contemporary society. From the History channel to AMC, pseudo-scientific history is trendy today, but Hancock wrote this book 25 years ago, and his background as a respected journalist for the Economist afforded him some level legitimacy in my mind.
Unfortunately I came away from Fingerprints of the Gods with significant problems. To put it nicely, the book is too ambitious given the weight of its evidence. But let’s start with the writing.
Part travel narrative, Hancock introduces his evidence by recounting his visits to historical locations around the world. This approach captured my attention at first, but it quickly became a distraction from his thesis. He is also repetitive, often making the same point and asking the same questions in multiple chapters. That said, Fingerprints is engaging and for the most part well written, if not exactly well reasoned, but we’ll get into that. First, there were some redeeming qualities that I think are worth mentioning.
Hancock highlights interesting historical anomalies that could have intriguing implications for the current accepted timeline of ancient history. Some of these points include: the hypothesis that Ancient cataclysm mythologies from around the world could be a historical record of mankind’s’ experience during the last Ice Age (which ended around 9000 BC); evidence that the Sphinx in Egypt was subject to a significant amount of water erosion, possible only in a climate that pre-dates the dynasties of Ancient Egypt; detailed maps of what seems to be Antarctica that were created hundreds of years before it was discovered. There are others, but these points in particular fascinated me, and who knows? There could be kernels of truth there that are worth exploring.
Unfortunately I also found that Hancock tends to make mountains of molehills, and that he has no problem with a “Gods of the gaps” approach to history. I was routinely disappointed and surprised how evidence that I found only moderately interesting, tenuous or even irrelevant led him to absolute conviction about their historical implications. When viewed broadly, the evidence he strings together make for an interesting narrative, but the foundation of that narrative is based on conclusions that require enormous leaps of faith on the part of the reader. For instance, he insists that because maps that predate the discovery of Antarctica seem to show Antarctica before it was covered in ice, that must mean that someone mapped Antarctica 15,000 years ago using precise cartographic techniques rivaled only in modern times. Never mind the possibility that the same historical maps are riddled with other geographical inaccuracies, and it's possible that he's misinterpreting one of those. The presence of what seems to be Antarctica in the maps is not by itself conclusive evidence of anything; it's no more than a potential reason to look into it further.
Perhaps most damning is Hancock’s oblivious hypocrisy regarding his conflicts with “mainstream” historians. He pokes small holes in the current accepted timeline of human history and then lambasts mainstream archaeology for not considering the problems with their timeline, but expresses absolutely no doubt in his own hypotheses, despite the gargantuan gaps in his logic. Why would a modern archaeologist take his conclusions seriously when Hancock himself seems unable to impartially consider the facts?
In the end, Hancock’s forceful conclusions from a small amount of evidence undermine his legitimacy. His fanatic conviction, especially in his concluding chapter, is almost religious, and the entire book is laced with ill-fitting, superstitious themes that are at odds with the evidence-based, scientific treatise he sought, by his own admission, to write.
I have no doubt that many of the assumptions that modern historians make about human history will be proven wrong as we learn more about our past – history has a way of surprising us. And I’m grateful that I read this book because it did give me some insight into some possible areas for a breakthrough. But Fingerprints of the Gods has an unfounded, superstitious conviction in an alternate history that is based on evidence that is no more than mildly intriguing. Don't waste your time.
I don’t think I’d ever have bought Fingerprints of the Gods on my own, but it was given to me as a gift by family who know I’m interested in history. And I’ll admit, while skeptical, I was intrigued. The reason for my amusement was because Fingerprints is a detailed narrative about a journalists’ search for evidence of an ancient civilization lost to history, that, in his view, pre-dated the Egyptians by thousands of years and achieved a level of technological and scientific advancement not matched until our contemporary society. From the History channel to AMC, pseudo-scientific history is trendy today, but Hancock wrote this book 25 years ago, and his background as a respected journalist for the Economist afforded him some level legitimacy in my mind.
Unfortunately I came away from Fingerprints of the Gods with significant problems. To put it nicely, the book is too ambitious given the weight of its evidence. But let’s start with the writing.
Part travel narrative, Hancock introduces his evidence by recounting his visits to historical locations around the world. This approach captured my attention at first, but it quickly became a distraction from his thesis. He is also repetitive, often making the same point and asking the same questions in multiple chapters. That said, Fingerprints is engaging and for the most part well written, if not exactly well reasoned, but we’ll get into that. First, there were some redeeming qualities that I think are worth mentioning.
Hancock highlights interesting historical anomalies that could have intriguing implications for the current accepted timeline of ancient history. Some of these points include: the hypothesis that Ancient cataclysm mythologies from around the world could be a historical record of mankind’s’ experience during the last Ice Age (which ended around 9000 BC); evidence that the Sphinx in Egypt was subject to a significant amount of water erosion, possible only in a climate that pre-dates the dynasties of Ancient Egypt; detailed maps of what seems to be Antarctica that were created hundreds of years before it was discovered. There are others, but these points in particular fascinated me, and who knows? There could be kernels of truth there that are worth exploring.
Unfortunately I also found that Hancock tends to make mountains of molehills, and that he has no problem with a “Gods of the gaps” approach to history. I was routinely disappointed and surprised how evidence that I found only moderately interesting, tenuous or even irrelevant led him to absolute conviction about their historical implications. When viewed broadly, the evidence he strings together make for an interesting narrative, but the foundation of that narrative is based on conclusions that require enormous leaps of faith on the part of the reader. For instance, he insists that because maps that predate the discovery of Antarctica seem to show Antarctica before it was covered in ice, that must mean that someone mapped Antarctica 15,000 years ago using precise cartographic techniques rivaled only in modern times. Never mind the possibility that the same historical maps are riddled with other geographical inaccuracies, and it's possible that he's misinterpreting one of those. The presence of what seems to be Antarctica in the maps is not by itself conclusive evidence of anything; it's no more than a potential reason to look into it further.
Perhaps most damning is Hancock’s oblivious hypocrisy regarding his conflicts with “mainstream” historians. He pokes small holes in the current accepted timeline of human history and then lambasts mainstream archaeology for not considering the problems with their timeline, but expresses absolutely no doubt in his own hypotheses, despite the gargantuan gaps in his logic. Why would a modern archaeologist take his conclusions seriously when Hancock himself seems unable to impartially consider the facts?
In the end, Hancock’s forceful conclusions from a small amount of evidence undermine his legitimacy. His fanatic conviction, especially in his concluding chapter, is almost religious, and the entire book is laced with ill-fitting, superstitious themes that are at odds with the evidence-based, scientific treatise he sought, by his own admission, to write.
I have no doubt that many of the assumptions that modern historians make about human history will be proven wrong as we learn more about our past – history has a way of surprising us. And I’m grateful that I read this book because it did give me some insight into some possible areas for a breakthrough. But Fingerprints of the Gods has an unfounded, superstitious conviction in an alternate history that is based on evidence that is no more than mildly intriguing. Don't waste your time.
May 9, 2012
So intriguing! Had a really hard time putting this down. I admire Graham Hancock for the depth of his research and the restraint to not commit to only one solution to the many questions asked by this thought provoking work. As hard as it may be for an author to leave the door open to multiple possibilities, the fact that science has not caught up to the mysteries of mankind means that we still have some serious soul searching and exploring to do. I wish that this had been required reading at some point in my education. Our culture provides us with the false of security that we have so many answers, but this is a collection of mysteries that inspire one to realize that we really have more questions than answers.
December 31, 2017
Love Graham Hancock's books. If you love to steer away from the status quo. If you would like to turn a blind eye to the mainstream rhetoric and propaganda and wish to look at an alternative view; or enlightened view; about our Earth's distant past then I recommend Graham Hancock. His books really do open one's eyes. Fingerprints of the Gods is an amazing book. Just like Eric Von Daniken Graham Hancock gets the grey matter firing up and opens up a whole panorama of possibilities. I do recommend this book.🐯👍
March 25, 2010
Excellent book, very though provoking. Huge amounts of data and research as one takes a voyage with G. Hancock through his global research voyage hunting to discover the truth.
The sheer volume of data presented in this book will either be something you appreciate [because it makes his case very strong:] or make you shy away.
There are many things to discuss about this book, but the conclusions seem to be that:
1. There was an advanced civilization living prior to the last ending iceage in 11,000BC+ most likely in Antartica [which then was warmer and not under ice:].
2. Major floods, combined with a polar shift, and probably also tectonic movements which moved antartica into the polar region [and canada/wisconsin-usa out of it:] occurred, sea levels rise 400 feet in less than 200 years, and left the earth devastated for at least 1000 if not 2000 years.
3. Major myth stories of "the flood" permeate the world. It is the most common ancient myth story on earth, shared in more than 130+ cultures and 80+ countries.
4. Those who survived the upheaval were often reduced to barbarism, and cannibalism spread around the world. Forcing everyone back into "the stone age"
5. Some of the people from the advanced civilization managed to educate, teach and share their knowledge of science, calendars, long-term celestial cycles, medicine and astronomy with various peoples across the world. The laps of time between devastation and these civilisers actually being able to carry out their work is likely to have been in the order of several thousand years.
6. Given the gap of time between devastation, barabrisim and survial, and their re-encounter with the "civilisers" these people were often viewed as Gods; and are described in all north, central, north American, Egyptian and Sumerian cultures in a similar manner: White men, with long bears; often symbolized by the snake [either as a crown, and/or as their boats:], and with a cross [This is pre-Christianity, and these crosses are more like upright "X"s:]
7. In many areas these cilizers are killed or fail, or their methods are taken but corruption or power thwarts their efforts. However a few areas take on the ideas well, especially Egypt.
8. Egypt was in 11,000BC a tropical location, with lush lands and rainfall. It was the "age of Leo", and a Sphinx was built that would face the rising sun in Leo perfectly (in 10,450 BC).
9. Three pyramids were built, with stones so big it defies logic, in a pattern that aligns it perfectly with the belt of Orion, the river Nile as the Milky-way and Drakonis [back then the North Star:]. This new alignment will only re-occurre again in some 25,920 years
10. The pyramids use the π and phi ratio, numbers that relate to the processional spin of the earth [how fast it "wobbles" and the 25,920 years required to return to where it was:].
11. The grand pyramid is an exact-to-scale model of the earth, where if one multiples the ratio of precession to the sphere the pyramid makes, it is in exact proportion to the round-earth itself.
12. One theory has it that the Pyramids were built as important markers for a future civilization. The exact correlation of their position with the movements of the stars would give future generations knowledge as to when they were built [10,450 BC:]
14. The Olecs adopt the calendar system "from the gods" which later the Mayan adapt from the Olecs, known as "The Mayan calendar". This calendar employs similar mathematics and information about earth's precession, as well as the inevitability of the earth undergoing total devastation again in the future.
15. Many large stones are found, like those at Giza, Egypt in many south/central American sites; including cities at the top of mountain lakes and Machu Pichu, Peru. These stones also show the same techniques for fitting, cutting and cementing in every site. Along with the same large 80 to 200 ton blocks; often raised in confines which are not logically possible.
16. Ancient folk lore speaks in both the Americas and in Egypt of Magicians/Gods who could move large stones with "sound" or "words of command". And both also speak of Dwarves who were builders.
17. After the Giza pyramids every following pyramid was built in inferior methods, probably some 6 to 8,000 years later. Then, near the end of the Egyptian rule, one pyramid is built with all its walls covered with texts that describe foreign words, machines, implements and things which Egyptologists can't translate, or more air ships in a sort of historification of their knowledge.
18. The next two small pyramids they built, no one has been able to enter, since Egypt has placed a military base around them. No one, no scientist, Egyptologist, historian or the like has ever been able to visit them.
19. People from 10AD to 1500AD find various maps of Antartica, which show it without ice and correct place the mountains and rivers at where they would be if there wasn't 2-miles of ice over them today.
20. The Sphinx erodes from 6000-8000 years of rainfall between 11 millennium BC and 4,000 BC, until eventually Egypt turns into a desert.
21. All the old texts and cultures [Egyptian, Mayan, north/south/central USA, India:] all speak of celestial ages being in relation to where the sun rises [we are in the age of Pisces still now:], and of there being a risk of total-global destruction between the passing of one age to the next. The Mayan calendar, possibly the oldest calendar system we know [and the most accurate, more so than our Gregorian:] seems to pin this date to two days before Christmas 2012.
and another 20 or so more points I could write... it just goes on and on, there is so much information here, well founded on research, that it really is a thick 500 page read that will bustle your mind.
Nearly all of the data is referenced between many cultures and many texts, with different quotes coming from all places [the Bible, Islamic faiths, Chinese ancient texts, mathematics, geology, astronomy, cultures all across the Americas, India and so forth:] -- that it makes it actually very hard to not believe Graham's Conclusions on the data he has so carefully collected.
If his Ideas are right, then it would mean that Civilisation has been completely destroyed in the past, and it can likely happen again; but this time around, what would be different? Would we loose everything? If we did, would those few who held their knowledge in their heads become "Gods"? Could we bridge spans of 2,000 years of time between one devastation and the coast of a new stable "drier" world to start off where we left off, or would all our ancient knowledge become "myth" once more?
Other questions that come up, it is clear from the history of many cited cultures, that who ever these "gods" were that gave them the gifts of civilization, that this knowledge also represented "power"; power which could be wielded over others; as it has been, since the time of Babylon [slaves, sacrifices etc:]. The question is: if all of mankind were stripped of all their tools, knowledge and technology, is it better to let them learn it all over themselves? Or to teach them what you knew, even if that means that they may not know how to handle or appreciate it, and thus get lost in a cycle of corruption, abuse and power?
Who knows, maybe the last civilization was "smarter" than this one. Looking at the state of the world, one has to wonder...
The sheer volume of data presented in this book will either be something you appreciate [because it makes his case very strong:] or make you shy away.
There are many things to discuss about this book, but the conclusions seem to be that:
1. There was an advanced civilization living prior to the last ending iceage in 11,000BC+ most likely in Antartica [which then was warmer and not under ice:].
2. Major floods, combined with a polar shift, and probably also tectonic movements which moved antartica into the polar region [and canada/wisconsin-usa out of it:] occurred, sea levels rise 400 feet in less than 200 years, and left the earth devastated for at least 1000 if not 2000 years.
3. Major myth stories of "the flood" permeate the world. It is the most common ancient myth story on earth, shared in more than 130+ cultures and 80+ countries.
4. Those who survived the upheaval were often reduced to barbarism, and cannibalism spread around the world. Forcing everyone back into "the stone age"
5. Some of the people from the advanced civilization managed to educate, teach and share their knowledge of science, calendars, long-term celestial cycles, medicine and astronomy with various peoples across the world. The laps of time between devastation and these civilisers actually being able to carry out their work is likely to have been in the order of several thousand years.
6. Given the gap of time between devastation, barabrisim and survial, and their re-encounter with the "civilisers" these people were often viewed as Gods; and are described in all north, central, north American, Egyptian and Sumerian cultures in a similar manner: White men, with long bears; often symbolized by the snake [either as a crown, and/or as their boats:], and with a cross [This is pre-Christianity, and these crosses are more like upright "X"s:]
7. In many areas these cilizers are killed or fail, or their methods are taken but corruption or power thwarts their efforts. However a few areas take on the ideas well, especially Egypt.
8. Egypt was in 11,000BC a tropical location, with lush lands and rainfall. It was the "age of Leo", and a Sphinx was built that would face the rising sun in Leo perfectly (in 10,450 BC).
9. Three pyramids were built, with stones so big it defies logic, in a pattern that aligns it perfectly with the belt of Orion, the river Nile as the Milky-way and Drakonis [back then the North Star:]. This new alignment will only re-occurre again in some 25,920 years
10. The pyramids use the π and phi ratio, numbers that relate to the processional spin of the earth [how fast it "wobbles" and the 25,920 years required to return to where it was:].
11. The grand pyramid is an exact-to-scale model of the earth, where if one multiples the ratio of precession to the sphere the pyramid makes, it is in exact proportion to the round-earth itself.
12. One theory has it that the Pyramids were built as important markers for a future civilization. The exact correlation of their position with the movements of the stars would give future generations knowledge as to when they were built [10,450 BC:]
14. The Olecs adopt the calendar system "from the gods" which later the Mayan adapt from the Olecs, known as "The Mayan calendar". This calendar employs similar mathematics and information about earth's precession, as well as the inevitability of the earth undergoing total devastation again in the future.
15. Many large stones are found, like those at Giza, Egypt in many south/central American sites; including cities at the top of mountain lakes and Machu Pichu, Peru. These stones also show the same techniques for fitting, cutting and cementing in every site. Along with the same large 80 to 200 ton blocks; often raised in confines which are not logically possible.
16. Ancient folk lore speaks in both the Americas and in Egypt of Magicians/Gods who could move large stones with "sound" or "words of command". And both also speak of Dwarves who were builders.
17. After the Giza pyramids every following pyramid was built in inferior methods, probably some 6 to 8,000 years later. Then, near the end of the Egyptian rule, one pyramid is built with all its walls covered with texts that describe foreign words, machines, implements and things which Egyptologists can't translate, or more air ships in a sort of historification of their knowledge.
18. The next two small pyramids they built, no one has been able to enter, since Egypt has placed a military base around them. No one, no scientist, Egyptologist, historian or the like has ever been able to visit them.
19. People from 10AD to 1500AD find various maps of Antartica, which show it without ice and correct place the mountains and rivers at where they would be if there wasn't 2-miles of ice over them today.
20. The Sphinx erodes from 6000-8000 years of rainfall between 11 millennium BC and 4,000 BC, until eventually Egypt turns into a desert.
21. All the old texts and cultures [Egyptian, Mayan, north/south/central USA, India:] all speak of celestial ages being in relation to where the sun rises [we are in the age of Pisces still now:], and of there being a risk of total-global destruction between the passing of one age to the next. The Mayan calendar, possibly the oldest calendar system we know [and the most accurate, more so than our Gregorian:] seems to pin this date to two days before Christmas 2012.
and another 20 or so more points I could write... it just goes on and on, there is so much information here, well founded on research, that it really is a thick 500 page read that will bustle your mind.
Nearly all of the data is referenced between many cultures and many texts, with different quotes coming from all places [the Bible, Islamic faiths, Chinese ancient texts, mathematics, geology, astronomy, cultures all across the Americas, India and so forth:] -- that it makes it actually very hard to not believe Graham's Conclusions on the data he has so carefully collected.
If his Ideas are right, then it would mean that Civilisation has been completely destroyed in the past, and it can likely happen again; but this time around, what would be different? Would we loose everything? If we did, would those few who held their knowledge in their heads become "Gods"? Could we bridge spans of 2,000 years of time between one devastation and the coast of a new stable "drier" world to start off where we left off, or would all our ancient knowledge become "myth" once more?
Other questions that come up, it is clear from the history of many cited cultures, that who ever these "gods" were that gave them the gifts of civilization, that this knowledge also represented "power"; power which could be wielded over others; as it has been, since the time of Babylon [slaves, sacrifices etc:]. The question is: if all of mankind were stripped of all their tools, knowledge and technology, is it better to let them learn it all over themselves? Or to teach them what you knew, even if that means that they may not know how to handle or appreciate it, and thus get lost in a cycle of corruption, abuse and power?
Who knows, maybe the last civilization was "smarter" than this one. Looking at the state of the world, one has to wonder...
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
June 23, 2014
Scary. As. Hell.
This is a real life horror story. This explains a lot about human history. I totally understand why some people might label it as weird, conspiracy-theory-esque, or bologna. But ultimately I feel that it was well researched, well reasoned, and well written.
Basically what this book does is add to our history books, it doesn't necessarily have to re-write them. Bits might need a little tweaking now, but the gist of what we understand about Egypt isn't just flat out wrong, its misguided and misleading.
It deals with much more than Egypt of course, a lot of information regarding Incas, Mayans, even a smidgen of Atlantis thrown in, but Mr. Hancock rightly stays as far away from Atlantis as he can. He recognizes that subject is a bit touchy for some people, so he grounds himself in as many facts and as much evidence as he can.
What it all comes down to however, is just simply a desire to increase peoples mind-openness. Mr. Hancock tries really hard to point out stuff that can be considered evidence and even proof, and consistently runs into giant walls when confronting academics or historians with these things. So many people don't want to be wrong about human history that they'll just sit there with their thumbs in their ears, humming very loudly and chanting "I can't hear you! I can't hear you! I can't hear you!"
This very well could end up being the latest flat/round earth debate. Did Egyptian history extend back 37,000 or so years? Was there a cataclysm that killed 95% of humanity about 12,000 or 13,000 years ago? Did the Egyptians try to leave a marker as a warning about this catastrophic occasion, in the form of 3 large pyramids arrayed in the layout of Orion's belt? I think so. He's got me convinced.
Are we being fools for not, at the very least, taking a closer look at the evidence being presented? Are historians being way too complacent and way too arrogant about what they believe to be the truth about history? Are we dooming ourselves, as a species, by not preparing ourselves better for a potential new cataclysm in the future?
I am greatly fearful for our entire species, all of the ignorance, the prejudice, the hatred and fear directed at anyone who tries to scream that the sky is falling... when it very well might be.
Read this.
Think about it.
Pass it on.
Keep thinking.
This is a real life horror story. This explains a lot about human history. I totally understand why some people might label it as weird, conspiracy-theory-esque, or bologna. But ultimately I feel that it was well researched, well reasoned, and well written.
Basically what this book does is add to our history books, it doesn't necessarily have to re-write them. Bits might need a little tweaking now, but the gist of what we understand about Egypt isn't just flat out wrong, its misguided and misleading.
It deals with much more than Egypt of course, a lot of information regarding Incas, Mayans, even a smidgen of Atlantis thrown in, but Mr. Hancock rightly stays as far away from Atlantis as he can. He recognizes that subject is a bit touchy for some people, so he grounds himself in as many facts and as much evidence as he can.
What it all comes down to however, is just simply a desire to increase peoples mind-openness. Mr. Hancock tries really hard to point out stuff that can be considered evidence and even proof, and consistently runs into giant walls when confronting academics or historians with these things. So many people don't want to be wrong about human history that they'll just sit there with their thumbs in their ears, humming very loudly and chanting "I can't hear you! I can't hear you! I can't hear you!"
This very well could end up being the latest flat/round earth debate. Did Egyptian history extend back 37,000 or so years? Was there a cataclysm that killed 95% of humanity about 12,000 or 13,000 years ago? Did the Egyptians try to leave a marker as a warning about this catastrophic occasion, in the form of 3 large pyramids arrayed in the layout of Orion's belt? I think so. He's got me convinced.
Are we being fools for not, at the very least, taking a closer look at the evidence being presented? Are historians being way too complacent and way too arrogant about what they believe to be the truth about history? Are we dooming ourselves, as a species, by not preparing ourselves better for a potential new cataclysm in the future?
I am greatly fearful for our entire species, all of the ignorance, the prejudice, the hatred and fear directed at anyone who tries to scream that the sky is falling... when it very well might be.
Read this.
Think about it.
Pass it on.
Keep thinking.
December 26, 2017
I recommend this book to those who are interested in alternative or ancient history. Reading it will definitely compel you to reconsider your faith about the past that there existed advanced civilizations previously on earth as well. A very thought provoking and fascinating book about lost civilizations !!!
May 23, 2018
For me, this was a very entertaining read - well, listen in this case. I thought Graham Hancock did an excellent job narrating his book, and did a great job keeping me interested and excited about the content the whole time. If you have any fascination with the mysteries of the pyramids, or the Sphinx, or the ancient civilizations of South and Central America, this is worth checking out. I'll be checking out Mr. Hancock's follow up book to this at some point.
February 22, 2020
I read this for fun. It's a thick book but most of it is easily readable at a quick pace. There is a large section focused on precession that would probably be hard for people who didn't recently watch an intro to astronomy video. There's also some math that people-who-don't-do-well-with-numbers will find difficult. Just either plow right through it or spend some time trying to understand it.
I loved the sarcastic bits. He loves to point out the "razor-sharp reasoning of Egyptology" (pg. 340). It's an information dump but that's the whole whole purpose of this book-to give you evidence of a lost, technologically advanced civilization.
I took a lot of notes for a fun read. I have a list of things I neeeeed to Google. It's been 20 years since it was published so I'm sure there are updates and developments.
When people asked what I was reading, I described it as Ancient Aliens without the Aliens. I was always a fan of Ancient Aliens but not a believer. This book made me a believer in an ancient, advanced society. Now I'm just worried about the next earth crust displacement movement. Going to Google "reverse polarity" now to see how awful that'll be. And then I'll Google everything else on my list.
PS All the people calling earth crust displacement "tectonic" in their reviews must not have read that whole chapter. It even insisted that it wasn't tectonic movement. Thank you.
I loved the sarcastic bits. He loves to point out the "razor-sharp reasoning of Egyptology" (pg. 340). It's an information dump but that's the whole whole purpose of this book-to give you evidence of a lost, technologically advanced civilization.
I took a lot of notes for a fun read. I have a list of things I neeeeed to Google. It's been 20 years since it was published so I'm sure there are updates and developments.
When people asked what I was reading, I described it as Ancient Aliens without the Aliens. I was always a fan of Ancient Aliens but not a believer. This book made me a believer in an ancient, advanced society. Now I'm just worried about the next earth crust displacement movement. Going to Google "reverse polarity" now to see how awful that'll be. And then I'll Google everything else on my list.
PS All the people calling earth crust displacement "tectonic" in their reviews must not have read that whole chapter. It even insisted that it wasn't tectonic movement. Thank you.
September 14, 2012
I must say I enjoyed reading the book. I like Hancock's style of writing, which is clear and easy to follow. Unfortunately he does not score so high on objective research side. I appreciate the years of work he put to the material, but he even admits himself that he is on a mission to "prove" his theory, which puts him in the same class of mainstream academicians that he criticizes. He says he did not focus on Antarctica, because he realized he does not "need" it. Well, looking for truth requires objectivity and freedom from bias. As soon as we talk about "needs" we can say goodbye to truth and welcome fanaticism.
Apart from that I think he has interesting points on the origin of our current civilization, and it certainly is fun to read some alternative speculations.
Apart from that I think he has interesting points on the origin of our current civilization, and it certainly is fun to read some alternative speculations.
June 25, 2025
An interesting book opening up new thought lines as to where we started as human beings. The author uses logical thinking and extrapolate on existing strange facts to conclude the presence of one or more previous civilizations that were lost in human history.
Fact or fiction? time will tell, since the fact we know the most is that we only know part of our history as a race. we don't even know when exactly or even nearly we 'appeared', so it's fair enough to be open to new theories/ ideas as long as logic and evidence are seriously considered
MiM
Fact or fiction? time will tell, since the fact we know the most is that we only know part of our history as a race. we don't even know when exactly or even nearly we 'appeared', so it's fair enough to be open to new theories/ ideas as long as logic and evidence are seriously considered
MiM
November 14, 2018
A big massive 5 star re re re re read. So good and gets the old cogs ticking.
May 16, 2017
It wasn't aliens, man.
This was a train wreck. The cover promises evidence and the book provides patchwork mythology and a childlike fixation on the prospect of ancient giants, ending every sentence with, "Well, how do you explain that?"
You'd need to be a truly stupendous kind of idiot to fall for this. At one point the dude actually says, without a discernible flicker of irony:
Bearded men....
Serpents...
Crosses...
How likely was it to be an accident that symbols as distinctive as these should repeat themselves in widely separated cultures and at different periods of history?
Fuck, dude, you're right! How could so many different civilizations be aware of snakes, two sticks together, and beards? Evidence of Earth's Lost Civilization. A 15-foot-tall Annunaki nephilim pyramid builder (as mentioned in both The Bible and that one Assyrian etching that looks kind of like a tall guy) must have parked his spaceship on Macchu Picchu and dropped in to teach us beards.
The entire book can't rightly be called grasping at straws, because there are no straws to grasp at. I wish I had some straws to offer him. It's just blind faith. Hope wrapped in vague, half-understood astrophysics excerpts and quotes from pariah archaeologists hoping their degree and this woo-woo pseudojournalist can float their outrageous bullshit they're trying to push and allow them to make a name for themselves.
This was a train wreck. The cover promises evidence and the book provides patchwork mythology and a childlike fixation on the prospect of ancient giants, ending every sentence with, "Well, how do you explain that?"
You'd need to be a truly stupendous kind of idiot to fall for this. At one point the dude actually says, without a discernible flicker of irony:
Bearded men....
Serpents...
Crosses...
How likely was it to be an accident that symbols as distinctive as these should repeat themselves in widely separated cultures and at different periods of history?
Fuck, dude, you're right! How could so many different civilizations be aware of snakes, two sticks together, and beards? Evidence of Earth's Lost Civilization. A 15-foot-tall Annunaki nephilim pyramid builder (as mentioned in both The Bible and that one Assyrian etching that looks kind of like a tall guy) must have parked his spaceship on Macchu Picchu and dropped in to teach us beards.
The entire book can't rightly be called grasping at straws, because there are no straws to grasp at. I wish I had some straws to offer him. It's just blind faith. Hope wrapped in vague, half-understood astrophysics excerpts and quotes from pariah archaeologists hoping their degree and this woo-woo pseudojournalist can float their outrageous bullshit they're trying to push and allow them to make a name for themselves.
October 24, 2011
I read this just after high school, when my fascination with astronomy was at its peak. Here's what I remember: Hancock believes that human civilization is much older than we think it is. He believes that there was once a great civilization (let's call them the Atlanteans) that existed long before Sumeria or Egypt or Greece, and that they had some very advanced technology. But something terrible happened to their home land, maybe to all of earth at the time, he talks about it possibly having been the onset of the ice age, or the shifting of the magnetic poles, or possibly both, but anyway, they felt a need to travel the earth and pass their knowledge on to just about all of the other civilizations, who until then, were pretty young and not as advanced. How else would we come to have pyramids in both Mexico and Egypt, he asks? He draws a line to connect their gods and myths: Osiris in Egypt, Quetzalcoatl in Mexico, maybe even JC himself in the holy land. Even if you don't believe any of it, it's still a great read, and you at least have to admire the questions he raises about the technical precision of these structures that the ancients built, and their relationships to the stars, which can't be mere coincidence.
March 25, 2009
Finished up Fingerprints of the Gods over the weekend. And I am still thinking about all the implications that this book could have. I don't want to ruin it too much by laying everything out in this book. But just like most of modern times there is much we think we know about ourselves that maybe we don't.
Graham Hancock lays out his theory that there was a very educated very special civilization on our planet around 10,500 BC that was wiped out. The book details all of the fingerprints they left behind.
I recommend this book to everyone who is interested in history.
Graham Hancock lays out his theory that there was a very educated very special civilization on our planet around 10,500 BC that was wiped out. The book details all of the fingerprints they left behind.
I recommend this book to everyone who is interested in history.
December 23, 2018
Excellent and interesting book, despite being more than a decade old by now.
A lot of thought provoking ideas, theories and also plenty of items to back up at least the point that we should probably take a deeper look at our common pre-history and open up for some alternative narratives than what has been the established ones.
Of particular interest is the idea of ancient pre-historic high-civilisation, probably with some sort of global impact with a phenotype being described that makes you think of atlanteans, hyperboreans or some other form of 'white gods'. At least Hancock has piqued my interest- I will probably read some of his other books and also do some more studying on my own to flesh out some of the mythological connections between the Indo-European peoples.
A lot of thought provoking ideas, theories and also plenty of items to back up at least the point that we should probably take a deeper look at our common pre-history and open up for some alternative narratives than what has been the established ones.
Of particular interest is the idea of ancient pre-historic high-civilisation, probably with some sort of global impact with a phenotype being described that makes you think of atlanteans, hyperboreans or some other form of 'white gods'. At least Hancock has piqued my interest- I will probably read some of his other books and also do some more studying on my own to flesh out some of the mythological connections between the Indo-European peoples.
February 1, 2018
Substantial research and references. A journey with Graham through time at ancient locations. Really enjoyable and thought provoking... I learnt and discovered a few things as well.
April 6, 2013
If you have an open mind, this book is fascinating. Hancock provides a tome-ful of evidence that an advanced civilization flourished on earth prior to 10,000 BC, and evidence of it may be buried under the ice in Antarctica.
Hancock believes that the pyramids are a solar clock, aligned to the equinox after a huge catastrophe struck the earth. This, he believes, was probably a shift of the continents, along with a shift of the earth's magnetism. His theories help explain the amazingly sophisticated astronomical knowledge of ancient people like the Egyptians and Mayas.
I enjoyed this book, but it was awfully long. The author goes on a lot about his travels to various ancient sites, rather than just sticking to his impressive evidence. Also, some of the scientific details went over my head. Still, he investigates true cultural mysteries, and makes you think a lot. I wished that he had gone into why the ruins and motifs of Mayan Central America and Angkor Wat are so similar. I think that his reply would probably be that the same advanced people who fled (in boats) the demise of the ancient civilization landed in both places.
Hancock believes that the pyramids are a solar clock, aligned to the equinox after a huge catastrophe struck the earth. This, he believes, was probably a shift of the continents, along with a shift of the earth's magnetism. His theories help explain the amazingly sophisticated astronomical knowledge of ancient people like the Egyptians and Mayas.
I enjoyed this book, but it was awfully long. The author goes on a lot about his travels to various ancient sites, rather than just sticking to his impressive evidence. Also, some of the scientific details went over my head. Still, he investigates true cultural mysteries, and makes you think a lot. I wished that he had gone into why the ruins and motifs of Mayan Central America and Angkor Wat are so similar. I think that his reply would probably be that the same advanced people who fled (in boats) the demise of the ancient civilization landed in both places.
March 27, 2021
Difficult to read. The author picks and chooses what he wants in order to fit his shaky narrative. He takes local legends at face value when it works. Where there can be many different possibilities he jumps to enormous conclusions and goes with the highly improbable. A lot of the sources that he uses has been well and truly debunked. After a while this was painful to read. There are grains of truth intertwined with ludicrous. Yes, there is a lot we still do not know about south and central American cultures. Yes, they are very similar to Egyptian and Mesopotamian cultures. There can also be other explanations as to why this is. Explanations that do not include ancient, superior beings tens of thousands of years prior to the known start of civilizations. But I am not here to go through, point by point, all that is wrong with this fiction. It is a good story, do not get me wrong. But they are, right now, just that, stories, folklores. The author skipped over the process and went headlong with his imagination. I can see how people could be swayed by his persuasive arguments. But that does not make them true. The fact, the science are seriously lacking.
April 25, 2011
Michael Miley turned me on to Hancock during one of my visits to San Francisco. Since then I've read more of the author, seen one of his television documentaries and heard many of his interviews. The overwhelming conclusion I've drawn is that Hancock is earnest and well-intended. As his books about global poverty suggest, he is a compassionate and ethical fellow.
He is not, however, a specialist in history, geology or archeology. He is a learned amateur and, given his many years as a straight journalist, a decent writer. Fingerprints of the Gods is perhaps the best of his alternative histories to be recommended as an introduction to his work as it is more global than some of them.
He is not, however, a specialist in history, geology or archeology. He is a learned amateur and, given his many years as a straight journalist, a decent writer. Fingerprints of the Gods is perhaps the best of his alternative histories to be recommended as an introduction to his work as it is more global than some of them.
January 22, 2020
Completely agree with Ethan. The more I read of this the more I was put off continuing. The author tries far too hard to drive home his assertion that there was some ancient, high-tech civilization that passed on religion and science to the Egyptians and South American civilizations.
I am pretty sure that much of what he claims could be blown to pieces by experts. His desperate attempts to convince reads of his positions leads me to believe they are build on sand.
Fortunately I bought the audio book and can exchange it - which I did at the 2/3s point.
I am pretty sure that much of what he claims could be blown to pieces by experts. His desperate attempts to convince reads of his positions leads me to believe they are build on sand.
Fortunately I bought the audio book and can exchange it - which I did at the 2/3s point.
September 18, 2021
Un classico ormai della cripto-archeologia. Non puo' certo essere indicato come la summa del rigore scientifico (non quello ortodosso almeno), ma l'entusiasmo messo nelle argomentazioni e il coraggio delle associazioni ardite lo rendono una lettura intrigante e gustosa. Questa la premessa scettica, ma non occorre scomodare Shakespeare per adottare quel minimo di apertura mentale che permette di non ancorarsi allo hic et nunc ma di potere in un certo senso guardare oltre.
May 5, 2019
No comment.
Oppure. Regalo di compleanno di amici carissimi, l'ho incominciato e poi, a un certo punto, mi sono chiesto: "Ma che sto facendo? Perché perdere tempo così?".
Oppure. Regalo di compleanno di amici carissimi, l'ho incominciato e poi, a un certo punto, mi sono chiesto: "Ma che sto facendo? Perché perdere tempo così?".
September 22, 2021
Nope. I gave it a week and 150 pages. Life's too short to spend on pseudo science. Spoiler alert: the world didn't end in 2012.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 1,149 reviews