Please donate now to pay our monthly server fees:
 [More Info] |
|
|
|
Community Home Message Board Board Home Board Rules Board Extras: Arcade Calendar Links CauldronMUX [Client] Sister Forums: Asatru Lore |
|
Home |
|
|
|
Cauldron's Grimoire RetroRoleplaying RetroRoleplaying: The Blog Software Gadgets The Terran Empire |
|
|
|
|
 Charter Member |
While this web site is designed to work in all major browsers, we recommend Firefox.
|
|
a Linode VPS Formerly hosted by  Why Use Dreamhost? |
|
© 1998-2009 by Randall |
| Home > Books & Reviews > Speculative > Egypt: Child of Atlantis | Search |
Egypt: Child of Atlantis: A Radical Interpretation of the Origins of Civilization |
||||
|
|
||||
|
|
The author's Theosophical leanings become evident very early in this work (which is not surprising, as he is a Theosophist lecturer). He brings together data from a variety of sources both within and without the scientific community. This results, depending upon your personal belief system, in an extremely valuable approach or utter rubbish. He places a heavy reliance on the writings of H.P. Blavatsky (founder of the Theosophical movement) whose writings were dismissed at the time of their publication, but which have, albeit reluctantly, given more credence as more information has come to light. For those individuals who are primarily interested in Atlantis, its culture and its history - this is not the book for you. For those individuals primarily interested in Egyptology, this is not the book for you. If, on the other hand, you have a basic understanding of, and interest in, Theosophical thought as it relates to an interpretation of the history of the world during the past 25,000 years or so, this IS the book for you. Many of the references used in this book date back 100 years or so. At the time they were written they were dismissed as mere fantasy. Today some of them are getting a serious second look, while others continue to be dismissed. Unfortunately, the author (in many cases) tries to use negative arguments to make his case (i.e., scientists have not disproven this conjecture, so it must be true). It is not up to science to disprove his conjectures, it is up to him to offer proof. Conjecture and speculation, regardless how many examples and sources are cited, do not constitute proof, even in the field of "ancient mysteries." Amongst the more than 100 books I have reviewed this year, this is one of the ones which required the highest degree of concentration. Each chapter, indeed each paragraph, deserves to be read with total commitment to absorbing the information contained therein. If you are tired or distracted do not read this book. Whether or not you agree with the proposals and conclusions of the author, you will need your wits about you to make the most of what is contained within the covers of this book. The $20 price tag is insignificant when weighed against the sheer amount of data assembled by Mr. Gordon. Frankly, I expected a much "lighter" book (in tone) for the price. I was pleasantly surprised by the sincerity with which it was presented. Reviewed by Mike Gleason Author's Comments:
A friend brought to my attention your recent review of my book 'Egypt, Child of Atlantis', puzzled at the reviewer's suggestion that it was written purely for those interested in 'theosophical' concepts and apparently had little to do with either Atlantis or Egyptology.
The implication that I am a blind follower of Blavatsky is an amusing one although a light year or two away from the truth. The fact of the matter is that of the book's over 430 references, only a dozen were to Blavatsky's or other theosophical works. As to the fact that some of the references were over a hundred years old, certainly they were - because most of the trustworthily available material on the subject dealt with is older rather than newer. The closer one gets to the modern 'scientific' viewpoint, the more distorted becomes the whole perception of what the ancient traditions were all about because of the entirely false assumption by many of today's scholars and scientists that the Ancients' ideas were largely if not entirely based upon superstition. I made this point very firmly in the Introduction.
Finally, the book was written very specifically in response to the fact that most (even New Age) commentators fail to grasp the fact of there having been a definitely sequential structure to the ancient Egyptian system of thought (from top to bottom) and its associated architectural and artistic symbolism, all of it based upon highly rational sympathetic association tied to functionality. What I have tried to do is to show how and why it actually operates when put into the proper range of contexts - even scientific ones. All of this was done with an openly argued sequence of reasoning which - as your reviewer noted - requires the reader to pay close and serious attention to what is being said if he/she really wishes to understand the principles involved.
The book was always intended to open up a new perspective for general discussion amongst scholars and the lay public alike, in terms of understanding the Ancients on their own terms - and I hope that this will continue.
|
|||
