There's really no point adding any further mockery of this book... except I accidentally opened it on a random page and felt the stupidity was too overwhelming not to comment on. On page 83, the author discusses with incredulity the fact that the Egyptians had a calendar that counted from the first rising of Sirius; for what possible conceivable reason could the Egyptians have cared about Sirius, he asks in perplexity, rather than, say, the moon? Sirius can clearly have no significance to anybody, unless their civilisation was founded by space aliens...
...and he asks this, incredulously, in exactly the same paragraph that he mentions that the first rising of Sirius each year occurs at more or less exactly the time that the annual Nile floods, the central fact of Egyptian culture and economics, begin. Yes indeed, for what possible reason could a civilisation count their year as starting from a regular, easily perceptible astronomical event that coincides with the most important economic period of the year, it's truly unfathomable. [Von Daeniken rules out the possibility of a connexion to the flooding, because Sirius doesn't necessarily predict the exact day of the first flood each year, and hence the calendar matching the flooding must be a coincidence. Presumably he also thinks that, because our solar calendar doesn't have the coldest day of the year fall exactly on January 1 each year, there can be no relation between our calendar and the passage of the seasons?]
Lots of crackpots have ideas that collapse when you actually look at the real fact. Von Daeniken is almost impressive in how he's able to have his ideas totally collapse even just by looking at the 'facts' that he himself presents in the same paragraph as his ideas...
Although, to be fair, 'ideas' is stretching it. Looking at a few pages, his strategy is not so much 'having ideas' as 'asking questions, refusing to answer them, and then just assuming that therefore aliens'.
Here's an actual sample of his prose, from p.84:
The tomb in which a gold necklace and the skeleton of an entirely unknown animal were found probably belonged to King Udimu. Where did the animal come from? How can we explain the fact that the Egyptians had a decimal system already at the beginning of the First Dynasty? How did such a highly developed civilisation arise at such an early date? Where do objects of copper and bronze originate as early as the beginning of Egyptian culture? Who gave them their incredible knowledge of mathematics and a ready-made writing?
Before we deal with some monumental buildings which raise innumerable questions, let us take another glance at the old texts.
Where did the narrators of The Thousands and One Nights get their staggering wealth of ideas? How did anyone come to describe a lamp from which a magician spoke when the owner wished?
What daring imagination invented the 'Open Sesame?' incident in the tale of Ali Baba and the forty thieves?
Of course, such ideas no longer astonish us today, for the television set shows us talking picture at the turn of a switch.
It's fascinating. Not what he's saying, but how he's saying it. See, most sane people, having lead with the skeleton of an unknown animal, would have talked about it. But he sees it just as a jumping-off point for a question about the decimal system. He throws in tiny 'facts' (the king was called Udimu) to give the impression of detailed knowledge, but really he's just asking elementary questions. He implies the questions are unanswerable, because he doesn't give himself time to answer them*; it reads like an extreme case of ADHD, as he zips from one thing to another without any buildup or connection (and coming from the writer of MY reviews, that's saying something!)
Ancient egyptians... Arabian Nights (thousands of years later!)... the next page suddenly he's talking about Norse mythology. In the sagas, apparently, the Earth is "remarkably" described as a disc or ball (what should they have described it as!?), and Thor, the leader of the gods (he wasn't) is shown with a hammer. "Professor Kuehn", we're told (who? maybe he was mentioned in another chapter, but not in the several pages before or after this paragraph) believes that the word 'hammer' meant 'stone' in the stone age (actually it's obviously from a word that meant approximately 'stone-ish', 'stone-oid' or the like, and originally meant any stone-headed tool - but this transparent derivation happened in the Bronze Age), and therefore Thor must have been worshipped in the stone age (wait, what? HOW DOES THAT INFERENCE EVEN PRETEND TO MAKE SENSE!?). And since Thor is known as the Thunderer, he must be a reference to space aliens who make the sky unsafe for human travel (because the alternative theory, that people were aware of the existence of thunder, is too ludicrous for him to even consider). Anyway, the page after that we're on to the Apocryphal Books of Abraham and Moses, and this wonderfully contemptuous dismissal of all other writers: "a number of scholars would like to stick to the so-called realities". a page later, we're on to "63rd Inca ruler Pachatui IV".
[he loves details. 63rd ruler. When he, in between these topics, dismisses the Theory of Relativity on the grounds that "19th century mathematicians" proved that trains were impossible because passengers would die when the train reached 21 miles an hour. 21. See, details - that means he knows what he's talking about! You couldn't just make up a detail like that. So who cares how ridiculous it is to blame 'mathematicians' for their theories on the human ability to withstand high-speed travel? (In reality, "mathematicians" means Dionysius Lardner, an astronomer, who did indeed believe that travelling at a sufficiently "high speed" would result in asphyxiation - but the 21 mph is a random figure plucked out of the air by von Daeniken to make himself look more informed. Interestingly, although there was a hysterical fear of early train travel, including a few notes of concern from doctors about things like the level of pollution inside tunnels, the fearmongering was almost entirely drummed up by politicians, businessmen, quacks and madmen, and the train companies had to hire actual doctors to calm the public. The lesson here is not that the nebulous establishment of intellectuals was suppressing progress through pessimism and the 'so-called realities' of the scientific method, but rather that people like von Daeniken have always existed, have always been exploited by political forces, and have always had to be combated by actual people who know what they're talking about)]
Well, if you want to stick to 'the realities', this isn't the book for you. More than that, though, it's not just wrong, it's not just insane, it's palpably incoherent. It's a guy ranting on the street corner.
But it is interesting how he seems to have homed in on the characteristics of a conspiracy theory, not just in content, but in style. The endless questions - if we object, he can say "hey, I'm just asking questions! Why don't you want me asking questions? What are you trying to hide!?". The pointless (and often fictitious) details. The appeals to authority and popularity - the various 'Professor Kuehn's - that are too vague to actually be a form of accountability. The hostility to intellectuals and their attempts to control (in this case I think through hubris rather than malice?) what people are taught. The negative argument - rather than methodically putting out a case, he just tries to raise enough skepticism in the mainstream 'theory' that eventually people will go 'ugh, ok, it must have been aliens'.
[this is a recognised flaw in human reasoning, particularly important in things like chess. When you consider an option intently - a move in a game, a theory asking for belief, a politician - and eventually decide against that option, there's a strong tendency for you to immediately latch on to a new alternative option with limited scrutiny, even if you would never have accepted that option had you given it the same amount of thought you gave the first option.]
Anyway, since I have you on tenterhooks with all those questions above (is it aliens? it must be aliens, right?), here's a few answers for them, which von Daeniken somehow overlooked:
- I can't find any reference to an unusual animal in the tomb of Udimu (better known as Den). However, exotic animal skeletons, included hippos, leopards, baboons and elephants, are common in early Egyptian tombs. These animals were either caught locally, or imported through trade.
- the Egyptians probably had a decimal number system because they, like most people, had ten fingers
- the civilisation developed at such an 'early' date from earlier, less developed forms of the civilisation. It's not really an 'early' date at all, when you consider that humans had been around for tens if not hundreds of thousands of years by that point, and near-humans for much longer. Why was Egypt quicker to develop than anywhere else (other than Sumer)? Probably because of its climate - too barren for a high population of hunter gatherers, but with a river, the Nile, that when properly managed could feed very large numbers of people. This lead to large, dense populations.
- copper and bronze objects in early Egypt are, I suspect, mostly Egyptian in manufacture, shockingly. The copper was at first largely from the Sinai; the bronze was at first probably arsenic-contaminated copper, while long-distance tin trading developed later, including with a large tin mine in southern Turkey.
- it was mathematicians who gave Egyptians their mathematical concepts. Their writing system was developed by scribes.
- the narrators of the Thousand and One nights drew on their own imagination, and on a rich heritage of folk tales. Storytelling was a popular activity in an age with few sources of entertainment. However, neither of the stories von Daeniken knows - Ali Baba and Aladdin (which is set in China!) - are actually from the Arabian Nights. They only first appear in the 18th French 'translation' of the compilation by Galland. Galland learnt the stories, probably already in French, from a famous Syrian, Hanna Diyab, who was then staying in Paris (where he even lived in the palace at Versailles for a while); given that the stories are not attested before then, but rapidly became popular in the middle east after the French text was published (and after Hanna Diyab returned to Syria), and given that apparently the stories incorporate details from Hanna Diyab's own life, it's likely that they are either the invention of Hanna Diyab or at least heavily modified by him. There's no reason to think that they are of any great age, and I think that if the flying saucers had visited 18th century Paris, people would have noticed...
[the idea of 'open sesame' seems just to be a magical extension of the common practice of requiring a passcode to enter a camp]
------
ANYWAY. It's a load of bollocks.
But I will credit the author with one thing: the title. Later editions were published as "Chariot of the Gods"; but this early edition I have is instead entitled "Chariot of the Gods?", which is both a superior marketing hook and a much more honest guide to the nature of the contents... ?