What do you think?
Rate this book
Atlantis: Insights from a Lost Civilization
The legend of lost Atlantis turns to fact as Shirley Andrews synthesizes a wealth of information from more than one hundred classical and Atlantean scholars, scientists, and psychics to describe the country and its inhabitants.
Review the scientific and geological evidence for an Atlantic continent, which refutes the popular notion that Atlantis was located in the Mediterranean. Follow the history of Atlantis from its beginnings to its destruction, and see a portrait of Atlantean its religion, architecture, art, medicine, and life style. Explore shamanism, the power of crystals, ancient techniques for health and healing, pyramid energy, ley lines, the influence of extraterrestrials and the origin of the occult sciences. Learn what happened to the survivors of Atlantis, where they migrated, and how the survivors and their descendants made their mark on cultures the world over.
Review the scientific and geological evidence for an Atlantic continent, which refutes the popular notion that Atlantis was located in the Mediterranean. Follow the history of Atlantis from its beginnings to its destruction, and see a portrait of Atlantean its religion, architecture, art, medicine, and life style. Explore shamanism, the power of crystals, ancient techniques for health and healing, pyramid energy, ley lines, the influence of extraterrestrials and the origin of the occult sciences. Learn what happened to the survivors of Atlantis, where they migrated, and how the survivors and their descendants made their mark on cultures the world over.
274 pages, Paperback
First published September 1, 2002
22 people are currently reading
115 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews
October 18, 2024
So where to begin with this book.
To start with, it’s a book with many interesting concepts though I did struggle to get through it at many times. I can tell it’s a passion project for the author and that she has a lot of belief and conviction in what she’s writing. I think the issue is it’s not a bad book but it doesn’t quite deliver on what it appears it will be about. It’s very spiritual heavy which isn’t a bad thing but if you’re looking for concrete scientific evidence about Atlantis this isn’t it. She does pose great points about how spirituality and science do not have to be separate sects and how they actually can be interlinked and explain things together.
I think the biggest issue is that many sources come from psychic readings which try as I might, I just cannot get onboard with. Another was using UFOs as an explanation for many things such as their feat for engineering, geomancy etc, which again I’m open to but not fully convinced by either. I can see why many people were put off by this book, it should be even more clearly designated that it is parapsychology (though it does actually state this on the back cover).
All in all, though it was a struggle to get through, I did really enjoy the content and I learnt a lot of incredible things about Atlantis and lots of other ancient civilisations. I just don’t believe it’s any closer to proving the existence of Atlantis with “science” - whatever that means to you. I’d probably rate it a 2.5 stars if I could. If it was a fiction book it’d be a brilliant 4 star but as it’s supposed to be non fiction, I’m going to have to give it 2 stars on Goodreads.
To start with, it’s a book with many interesting concepts though I did struggle to get through it at many times. I can tell it’s a passion project for the author and that she has a lot of belief and conviction in what she’s writing. I think the issue is it’s not a bad book but it doesn’t quite deliver on what it appears it will be about. It’s very spiritual heavy which isn’t a bad thing but if you’re looking for concrete scientific evidence about Atlantis this isn’t it. She does pose great points about how spirituality and science do not have to be separate sects and how they actually can be interlinked and explain things together.
I think the biggest issue is that many sources come from psychic readings which try as I might, I just cannot get onboard with. Another was using UFOs as an explanation for many things such as their feat for engineering, geomancy etc, which again I’m open to but not fully convinced by either. I can see why many people were put off by this book, it should be even more clearly designated that it is parapsychology (though it does actually state this on the back cover).
All in all, though it was a struggle to get through, I did really enjoy the content and I learnt a lot of incredible things about Atlantis and lots of other ancient civilisations. I just don’t believe it’s any closer to proving the existence of Atlantis with “science” - whatever that means to you. I’d probably rate it a 2.5 stars if I could. If it was a fiction book it’d be a brilliant 4 star but as it’s supposed to be non fiction, I’m going to have to give it 2 stars on Goodreads.
June 8, 2019
0.5 stars and that for how often I laughed at the sheer innanity and utter insanity of this book. Though it was generally followed by the crushing thought that things like /this/ are why we have ended up with the Trumps and Farages of the world. Or the flat earthers.
I found this on the shelf at my sister's place among the many, many books she has collected over the years but never actually read. At least not yet. All I saw was 'Atlantis' and I asked to borrow it as I'm quite interested in mythology in general and Greek mythology in particular. If I'd looked further then I might have hesitated. Either at the fact that the categories included 'Parapsychology' and 'UFOs'. Or the fact that the blurb on the back included such gems as 'Is it possible the tremendous achievements of the Atlanteans were aided by extraterrestrial contact'. An even further glance at the list of sources which included 'credible psychics' or the fact that the author speaks in the preface of her previous life in Atlantis where she used "my knowledge and skills in evil ways to gain power" and how "as a novice priest I came under the influence of older magi, who encouraged me to take advantage of women and abuse my talents to control others". Not to mention that apparently publishing this book was some form of atonement for all of that.
Still, when I finally did realize all of this at home, I decided to keep reading as I always finish books, both to ensure I'm exposed to different things, but to actually be able to speak on it afterwards rather than just about the little bit I read. Also, there was a 'I can't look away' quality to it like when witnessing an accident. It seemed far better than a lot of fantasy in some ways as those have to at least follow some kind of logic. This, though, could in one chapter call the Atlanteans incredibly smart and in the next describe how they kept making the same mistakes over and over and over again, and all after having come to Atlantis from elsewhere where they, you guessed it, made those same mistakes.
The author also uses many insulting and racist tropes despite claiming to have nothing but the utmost respect and reverence for the Atlanteans. Unable to believe that ancient civilizations could have created and achieved all that they have she falls back on old stereotyped ideas of extraterrestials having come to Earth and helped 'advance' those people to their peaks of accomplishments. Why would they do so? To mine Earth's mineral resources apparently. Why they didn't just do so without the natives is never explained, just a vague reference to needing their help. But surely if they are too simple or primitive to have accomplished their great feats alone, then they wouldn't be able to help aliens? Also, the convenience of having aliens involved means the author can now claim that Atlantis had airplanes and atomic bombs, which they apparently used to defeat enemies in Asia.
Beyond being utterly ludacrios, this gets even worse because in another part of the book the author uses the supposed similarities in witchcraft all over the world (like the fact they did actually fly on broomsticks) except in Asia to prove that Atlantis existed as they are apparently the only people to have gone all over (except Asia) and so spread witchcraft everywhere. So in one place they don't really go to Asia while in another they fought wars there and unleashed multiple atomic weapons. Then elsewhere again she claims they are responsible for something from China.
Other annoyances were the continued anti-science sentiment which ran through the book, particularly when the author insisted on equating it with amorality and religion with morality. Despite being extremely insulting and ignoring all of the multitude of immortal things done by /ALL/ of the great religions, it is completely contradicted elsewhere. See, in the first part it is said that everytime the Atlanteans drifted too much towards science and away from morality they experienced a calamity as the gods or the energies of the universe unleashed earthquakes, volcanoes... upon them. Yet, later, it is the priests of /religion and the occult/ which start getting greedy and abusing their powers which causes the divinities to react. A blatant contradiction of the first claim. Clearly whatever suits the particular narrative of that section of the book wins, regardless if it matches any other part of the author's fiction. It does, however, explain why she picked only those bits of science that supported her theories and ignored all of those which disproved it. Not to mention getting some important geological dates wrong. But, hey, what do scientists really know of all that, right? If psychics say it was otherwise, then clearly it was so for the author.
Yet even as most sciences are lambasted throughout the book (except for things like geomancy and astrology which she claims as sciences but which aren't), the author still at the same time praises the Atlanteans for all that they (and their celestial visitors!) were able to do. Like create air planes so advanced we couldn't duplicate them today (no wings). And this despite the 'credible psychics' giving such beautifully detailed descriptions of them. One must wonder how, if the psychics are so good, they can't provide us with this information. Also, apparently knowledge on Atlantis was divided oddly. At least this is what the author claims when trying to explain why so many of the descendants who made it elsewhere like Europe or the Americas weren't able to achieve all that the Atlanteans could. Except those that could, they of course did have that knowledge. So in one part she claims that they lost metallurgy and yet later some of the people she claims are their descendants had it. It all seems to depend on whether which ever people the author wants to claim as descendands possessed that knowledge or not. She had to make it all fit somehow and this odd division of knowledge on Atlantis is how. Convoluted, yes, but it allowed her to go around and claim all of the bigger people from the past.
The religion itself is also all over the map. It starts with Greek mythology (duh) and Poseidon is mentioned throughout the book. Yet at other points the author talks about how the Atlanteans knew there was only one supreme God. Yet almost in the same sentence she talks of other gods and goddess, but they are lessor. Everywhere she talks of multiple gods and goddesses. The latter often happens when she's speaking of what Plato and others knew of Atlantis. Is smacks of yet another blatant attempt to make official sources fit her vision. She twists and distorts them until they fit, creating 'lessor' gods to account for the fact others spoke of multiple gods in Atlantis, but really they only had one. Truly it's just the author's religionous nature shining through and her prejudice in thinking no advanced society couldn't have some form of Christianity (that would be amoral afterall). Her continued harping on of the sons of God and the daughters of man proves it, though she does twist this around to mean aliens on occassion which was rather odd.
It's like how she claims they were all pious and not materialistic, yet the whole religion chapter is full of places so lavishly decorated they are vulgar with gold and silver everywhere. And people eat with a gold derivative. But of course it's /science/ that led to them becoming too materialistic! (Sarcasm in case it escaped you). It's like the claims they were vegetarian despite plentiful descriptions of meat and sacrifice in religion section. But the vegetarian claim came near the section saying they could communicate with plants and flowers, so that may have been the cause there. It's like how she uses different people eating fish as proof of their Atlantean descent, except for the two set of people that didn't eat fish, but there's a handy excuse for that too.
Then let us not forget all of the abilities these Atlanteans had which we supposedly still possess today but can't access anymore: teleportation, levitation, the ability to speak with plants & animals, psychic powers... If this were all true and we have such credible psychics who can see so much of Atlantean life and there are people who remember their past lives on Atlantis, then how come they can't teach us all of these skills? Or help us remember it as apparently we all still possess the memories or what came before. Genetically somehow.
The other place this twisting and distorting happens is when she speaks of the architecture of Atlantis which she describes in startling detail and goes at great length to say was replicated elsewhere. She even mentions how Plato spoke of this design. Yet the simple possibility that Plato was speaking of one of those other places goes completely unacknowledged or, seemingly, not thought of. Evidence is taken and twisted to suit her preexisting narrative instead of followed to the truth. It's like when she claims some evidence that is listed under a different name and she writes it off as different people having different names for the Atlanteans. It's a convenient way to twist together everything she wants to use but which doesn't quite fit.
She also claims almost all great ancient achievements as belonging to Atlantis, no matter where in the ancient world they might have been. Fabulous cave paintings in France? Survivors of Atlantis. The crystal skull of Belize? Taken from Atlantis before its destruction and stolen by the people who owned the temple where it was found. Stonehenge? Survivors of Atlantis. Great knowledge of Egypt? Atlantean in origin. Gun powder? Atlanean (or extraterrestial and given to Atlantis). The fountain of youth? Atlantean. Flying carpets? Atlantean (based on the flying discs they used). The list goes on and isn't just limited to artefacts or knowledge. No, apparently Odin was someone who lived in Atlantis rather than being an actual Norse god.
Yet despite claiming the Atlaneans were so smart they committed a lot of stupidities. Like coming from an island that sank under the ocean after earthquakes and volcanoes, they elected to live on an island with lots of earthquakes and volcanoes. And remained there (or some of them) despite multiple bad periods. Strikes me more as stupidity. Also, apparently Atlantis was so great as to give lots of time for leisure and contemplation, well at least in the parts of the books were it wasn't a very difficult place to live due to the volatile natural phenomenon or the dangerous beasts that spoke to each other and tried to claim people as theirs to eat. Then we also have Atlantis being too small in the end meaning their warriors had to go out to conqueor other lands. Sounds logical, until she claims they were so successful because they had bountiful crops to feed them. Wait, wasn't it too small to sustain them only the sentence before?
The other bit which really stood out to me as far as Atlantean stupidity went is why they, with all of their experience living in places with frequent earthquakes and volcanoes, decided it was a good idea to build an /underground/ port? Set aside the fact they should have encountered lava creating it, why do that if the earth in your area is so unstable and will likely bring it all down on your heads? Especially when you live on an island and so have plenty of alternative and safer ways to build a port?
And lets not forget the crystal rays that can disintegrate people or the fact they were well connected with the rest of the world. It being easy, no hard, no easy, no hard to get there. Depends on what the purpose of that particular passage is.
Now, normally I don't look at author's personal lives, but in this case I couldn't help but look into at least some of it as I wasn't sure this could be real. Apparently she is married to a Harvard law professor. This is mindboggling to me. How can someone whose ideal world sneered at logic (the priests/priestesses which were at the pinnacle of Atlantean society, apparently, were trained to ignore logic (devil's work) for intuition) be married to someone whose who professional life revolves around it?
I found this on the shelf at my sister's place among the many, many books she has collected over the years but never actually read. At least not yet. All I saw was 'Atlantis' and I asked to borrow it as I'm quite interested in mythology in general and Greek mythology in particular. If I'd looked further then I might have hesitated. Either at the fact that the categories included 'Parapsychology' and 'UFOs'. Or the fact that the blurb on the back included such gems as 'Is it possible the tremendous achievements of the Atlanteans were aided by extraterrestrial contact'. An even further glance at the list of sources which included 'credible psychics' or the fact that the author speaks in the preface of her previous life in Atlantis where she used "my knowledge and skills in evil ways to gain power" and how "as a novice priest I came under the influence of older magi, who encouraged me to take advantage of women and abuse my talents to control others". Not to mention that apparently publishing this book was some form of atonement for all of that.
Still, when I finally did realize all of this at home, I decided to keep reading as I always finish books, both to ensure I'm exposed to different things, but to actually be able to speak on it afterwards rather than just about the little bit I read. Also, there was a 'I can't look away' quality to it like when witnessing an accident. It seemed far better than a lot of fantasy in some ways as those have to at least follow some kind of logic. This, though, could in one chapter call the Atlanteans incredibly smart and in the next describe how they kept making the same mistakes over and over and over again, and all after having come to Atlantis from elsewhere where they, you guessed it, made those same mistakes.
The author also uses many insulting and racist tropes despite claiming to have nothing but the utmost respect and reverence for the Atlanteans. Unable to believe that ancient civilizations could have created and achieved all that they have she falls back on old stereotyped ideas of extraterrestials having come to Earth and helped 'advance' those people to their peaks of accomplishments. Why would they do so? To mine Earth's mineral resources apparently. Why they didn't just do so without the natives is never explained, just a vague reference to needing their help. But surely if they are too simple or primitive to have accomplished their great feats alone, then they wouldn't be able to help aliens? Also, the convenience of having aliens involved means the author can now claim that Atlantis had airplanes and atomic bombs, which they apparently used to defeat enemies in Asia.
Beyond being utterly ludacrios, this gets even worse because in another part of the book the author uses the supposed similarities in witchcraft all over the world (like the fact they did actually fly on broomsticks) except in Asia to prove that Atlantis existed as they are apparently the only people to have gone all over (except Asia) and so spread witchcraft everywhere. So in one place they don't really go to Asia while in another they fought wars there and unleashed multiple atomic weapons. Then elsewhere again she claims they are responsible for something from China.
Other annoyances were the continued anti-science sentiment which ran through the book, particularly when the author insisted on equating it with amorality and religion with morality. Despite being extremely insulting and ignoring all of the multitude of immortal things done by /ALL/ of the great religions, it is completely contradicted elsewhere. See, in the first part it is said that everytime the Atlanteans drifted too much towards science and away from morality they experienced a calamity as the gods or the energies of the universe unleashed earthquakes, volcanoes... upon them. Yet, later, it is the priests of /religion and the occult/ which start getting greedy and abusing their powers which causes the divinities to react. A blatant contradiction of the first claim. Clearly whatever suits the particular narrative of that section of the book wins, regardless if it matches any other part of the author's fiction. It does, however, explain why she picked only those bits of science that supported her theories and ignored all of those which disproved it. Not to mention getting some important geological dates wrong. But, hey, what do scientists really know of all that, right? If psychics say it was otherwise, then clearly it was so for the author.
Yet even as most sciences are lambasted throughout the book (except for things like geomancy and astrology which she claims as sciences but which aren't), the author still at the same time praises the Atlanteans for all that they (and their celestial visitors!) were able to do. Like create air planes so advanced we couldn't duplicate them today (no wings). And this despite the 'credible psychics' giving such beautifully detailed descriptions of them. One must wonder how, if the psychics are so good, they can't provide us with this information. Also, apparently knowledge on Atlantis was divided oddly. At least this is what the author claims when trying to explain why so many of the descendants who made it elsewhere like Europe or the Americas weren't able to achieve all that the Atlanteans could. Except those that could, they of course did have that knowledge. So in one part she claims that they lost metallurgy and yet later some of the people she claims are their descendants had it. It all seems to depend on whether which ever people the author wants to claim as descendands possessed that knowledge or not. She had to make it all fit somehow and this odd division of knowledge on Atlantis is how. Convoluted, yes, but it allowed her to go around and claim all of the bigger people from the past.
The religion itself is also all over the map. It starts with Greek mythology (duh) and Poseidon is mentioned throughout the book. Yet at other points the author talks about how the Atlanteans knew there was only one supreme God. Yet almost in the same sentence she talks of other gods and goddess, but they are lessor. Everywhere she talks of multiple gods and goddesses. The latter often happens when she's speaking of what Plato and others knew of Atlantis. Is smacks of yet another blatant attempt to make official sources fit her vision. She twists and distorts them until they fit, creating 'lessor' gods to account for the fact others spoke of multiple gods in Atlantis, but really they only had one. Truly it's just the author's religionous nature shining through and her prejudice in thinking no advanced society couldn't have some form of Christianity (that would be amoral afterall). Her continued harping on of the sons of God and the daughters of man proves it, though she does twist this around to mean aliens on occassion which was rather odd.
It's like how she claims they were all pious and not materialistic, yet the whole religion chapter is full of places so lavishly decorated they are vulgar with gold and silver everywhere. And people eat with a gold derivative. But of course it's /science/ that led to them becoming too materialistic! (Sarcasm in case it escaped you). It's like the claims they were vegetarian despite plentiful descriptions of meat and sacrifice in religion section. But the vegetarian claim came near the section saying they could communicate with plants and flowers, so that may have been the cause there. It's like how she uses different people eating fish as proof of their Atlantean descent, except for the two set of people that didn't eat fish, but there's a handy excuse for that too.
Then let us not forget all of the abilities these Atlanteans had which we supposedly still possess today but can't access anymore: teleportation, levitation, the ability to speak with plants & animals, psychic powers... If this were all true and we have such credible psychics who can see so much of Atlantean life and there are people who remember their past lives on Atlantis, then how come they can't teach us all of these skills? Or help us remember it as apparently we all still possess the memories or what came before. Genetically somehow.
The other place this twisting and distorting happens is when she speaks of the architecture of Atlantis which she describes in startling detail and goes at great length to say was replicated elsewhere. She even mentions how Plato spoke of this design. Yet the simple possibility that Plato was speaking of one of those other places goes completely unacknowledged or, seemingly, not thought of. Evidence is taken and twisted to suit her preexisting narrative instead of followed to the truth. It's like when she claims some evidence that is listed under a different name and she writes it off as different people having different names for the Atlanteans. It's a convenient way to twist together everything she wants to use but which doesn't quite fit.
She also claims almost all great ancient achievements as belonging to Atlantis, no matter where in the ancient world they might have been. Fabulous cave paintings in France? Survivors of Atlantis. The crystal skull of Belize? Taken from Atlantis before its destruction and stolen by the people who owned the temple where it was found. Stonehenge? Survivors of Atlantis. Great knowledge of Egypt? Atlantean in origin. Gun powder? Atlanean (or extraterrestial and given to Atlantis). The fountain of youth? Atlantean. Flying carpets? Atlantean (based on the flying discs they used). The list goes on and isn't just limited to artefacts or knowledge. No, apparently Odin was someone who lived in Atlantis rather than being an actual Norse god.
Yet despite claiming the Atlaneans were so smart they committed a lot of stupidities. Like coming from an island that sank under the ocean after earthquakes and volcanoes, they elected to live on an island with lots of earthquakes and volcanoes. And remained there (or some of them) despite multiple bad periods. Strikes me more as stupidity. Also, apparently Atlantis was so great as to give lots of time for leisure and contemplation, well at least in the parts of the books were it wasn't a very difficult place to live due to the volatile natural phenomenon or the dangerous beasts that spoke to each other and tried to claim people as theirs to eat. Then we also have Atlantis being too small in the end meaning their warriors had to go out to conqueor other lands. Sounds logical, until she claims they were so successful because they had bountiful crops to feed them. Wait, wasn't it too small to sustain them only the sentence before?
The other bit which really stood out to me as far as Atlantean stupidity went is why they, with all of their experience living in places with frequent earthquakes and volcanoes, decided it was a good idea to build an /underground/ port? Set aside the fact they should have encountered lava creating it, why do that if the earth in your area is so unstable and will likely bring it all down on your heads? Especially when you live on an island and so have plenty of alternative and safer ways to build a port?
And lets not forget the crystal rays that can disintegrate people or the fact they were well connected with the rest of the world. It being easy, no hard, no easy, no hard to get there. Depends on what the purpose of that particular passage is.
Now, normally I don't look at author's personal lives, but in this case I couldn't help but look into at least some of it as I wasn't sure this could be real. Apparently she is married to a Harvard law professor. This is mindboggling to me. How can someone whose ideal world sneered at logic (the priests/priestesses which were at the pinnacle of Atlantean society, apparently, were trained to ignore logic (devil's work) for intuition) be married to someone whose who professional life revolves around it?
October 5, 2009
This was an odd book. It's ok for something interesting and different. The authors constant reference to aliens really put me off. I probably would have rated this higher had it not been for that.
May 4, 2011
I always enjoy reading books on Atlantis. Take me back...
If you enjoy exploring the Egypt-Atlantis Connection further, go to: williamhenry.net
Enjoy.
If you enjoy exploring the Egypt-Atlantis Connection further, go to: williamhenry.net
Enjoy.
August 12, 2020
The author claims that the Atlantis was definitely for real. Those people there got their knowledge from alien and they were so great everything was from Atlantis. Even every language in the world comes from them. Seriously pick a mystery and the author will prove it's from Atlantis, including Stonehendge, pyramids, you name it. And she knows that because she used to be a priest in Atlantis in her past life. A lot of sources are from some seers, so that explains it. However the Atlantis must have been really fascinating country. Too bad Plato made it all up.
November 19, 2019
Answered many of my questions
All my life I have always known that Atlantis was real on some level of my subconscious mind. Indeed, many times I had dreams of being there that were so real that I never doubted it. I had trouble getting the memories on a time-liine. This well written book did just that and explained much more of my niggling intuitions that constantly surface. Thank you Ms Andrews.
All my life I have always known that Atlantis was real on some level of my subconscious mind. Indeed, many times I had dreams of being there that were so real that I never doubted it. I had trouble getting the memories on a time-liine. This well written book did just that and explained much more of my niggling intuitions that constantly surface. Thank you Ms Andrews.
August 9, 2021
Another Look At Atlantis
Always a wealth of information. I love Atlantis and thank Ms. Andrew’s for the history in so many interpretations of the finest Authors in history. Plato was right and the established cultures around the world thrived because of Atlantis. Thank you so much!
Always a wealth of information. I love Atlantis and thank Ms. Andrew’s for the history in so many interpretations of the finest Authors in history. Plato was right and the established cultures around the world thrived because of Atlantis. Thank you so much!
September 9, 2020
I was very disappointed and frustrated with this book. Much of the information in the later chapters was more conjecture and psychic inferrence then fact. Even those correlations between cultures that exist as she has been able to show loose some creditability with her other statements.
May 17, 2017
Excellent, very well sourced book
June 6, 2024
Not enough sourcing to make it sound like anything other than speculation.
July 31, 2021
Speechless...Fascinated by the way facts have been presented...Simple language,to the point,informative and enriching...Thank you
February 24, 2021
An attempt at a synthesis of various ideas about Atlantis. The trouble is that the various things said about Atlantis are often mutually exclusive. This is shown in this book where you have the Atlanteans using psychic powers to rehabilitate criminals on the same page as Atlanteans feeding captives to giant crocodiles to give them a taste for human flesh.
January 11, 2013
I find the lost civilisation of Atlantis fascinating & found some enlightenment regarding it in this book. However at times all the research information was overwhelming & did not always make for good reading.
May 18, 2013
She contributes to both the evidence and the lore. Too often, her speculation is stated as fact.
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews