Rating: 
Summary: Search for the Ark
Review: While I read this book with intense interest I found that it raises far more questions then it really answers. I would have preferred that Mr. Hancock develop the theme of the Knights Templar in greater depth and I thought he rolled over too easily when he was denied access to the chapel in Axum. I did, however, enjoy the detail he provided in tracing the journey of the ark from Jerusalem and all of the historical background that came with it.
Rating: 
Summary: Plausible Biblical History written by New Age Charlatan
Review: Author Graham Hancock's itinerary for the travels of the Ark of the Covenant is quite convincing.And the "treasure hunt" format of this book makes it a delight to read. Unfortunately, when Mr. Hancock tries to provide any evidence more substantial than the "opportunity" provided by the timeline in his itinerary, he falls on his face. For the author of a book about the history of an object that is central to Western Religion, Mr. Hancock appears to be quite ignorant of the history and traditions of Judaism and Christianity. He admits as much, at the beginning of the book. He gives the impression that he learned more about them, only to the extent that they would prove his Egyptocentric theories. Indeed, he seems more interested in the Egyptian origins of the Jewish religion, than in the Jewish origins of Jewish religion. And he can't quite figure out how to fit modern Judaism into the equation. His open hostility to Hasidic Jews of Jerusalem, as well as the total lack of context of his description of the Temple Mount/Haram ash-Sherif Riots of 1990 is particularly troubling. And his research into legends of the "Holy Grail" is very shallow. Once he found a passage which seemed to describe the Ark, he stopped looking for other interpretations. He appears to be totally ignorant of "Grail" legends' much stronger link to the New Testament, than to the Old Testament. Indeed, the name "Joseph of Arimathea", a central figure in these legends, hardly appears at all in Hancock's descriptions of them. And his speculation on the properties of the Ark, belongs in a book on the Bermuda Triangle, rather than in a serious book on the history of Western Civilization and Religion. But it fits quite well with the New Age Egyptocentrism and Extraterrestrial speculation of his later books, "Fingerprints of the Gods", "The Message of the Sphinx", and culminating in "The Mars Mystery".
Rating:
Summary: Most plausable theory yet on the location of the Ark
Review: I thought this book was great. I understand a video is being done on the subject with information at Monument Pictures.
Rating: 
Summary: A truly fascinating and intriguing novel!
Review: Hancock really did his homework on this one. Perhaps more emphasis could have been placed on the 'Menelik' myth. Nevertheless, a great job! It is very plausible that the ark is indeed located in Axum, Ehtiopia. Why should we be surprised? Ethiopia, one of the largest and oldest empires in antiquity, has long since had ties to Jeruselum. Making referencene in today's bible, Ethiopia, or 'Cush' can first be seen in Genesis. Secondly, Moses' wife during the 'exodus' was an Ethiopian woman. In the book of Acts, Phillip the evangelist, made a proselyte, of the new testament doctrine concerning the risen Christ, of an Ethiopian treasurer, who was worshipping in Jeruselum and conducting business for Candace, the queen of Ethiopia, at the time. As we can conclude, it would have been a very easy task for the the Queen of Sheba, using established trade & religious routes, to visit Jeruselum and the wise King Solomon; and seeing his obvious appreciation of women, for her to return home pregnant. We can easily dismiss the notion of an Arabic queen. Ethiopia has a historical lineage of queens leading right up to mordern history. The notion that the Queen of Sheba was Arabic can undoubtedly be attributed to the fact that Ethiopia, an imperial power of that time rivaling Egypt, probably controlled that region of the world. But we cannot dismiss the Falashas, or 'black Jews' who were recently (in the 70s'), officially recognized as Jews and were provided settlements in Isreal. They had preserved Old Testament religion to the exact 'letter of the law' as written by Moses, even unto this day. An interesting note, they claim descent from Menelik I, the illegimate son of King Solomon and Makeba, the Queen of Sheba. Even more fascinating is the modern day Battle of Adowa. The king of Ethiopia, Menelik II, as he was called (because of traditional lineage), was reported to have used the ark in this battle. A battle in which the Ethiopians, armed with a few rifles, spearmen, and men on horseback, defeated the Italians, equipped with mordern day weaponry, to include artillery pieces. The odds were something like 4-to-1, in favor of the Italians. In review of the battle, some of the artillery pieces were not even fired. How is that for intriguing (this battle actually happened)? Sounds like the ark of the covenent again. The result of this battle gave recognition to Ethiopia as a modern day world power. Quite a leap from men on horseback to an eventual modern day equipped nation that worshipped the God of Isreal. Other world powers stood in line to conduct business with Menelik II and Ethiopia. The point being, the Ark of the Covenent could only be kept and maintained by a people adhering to the undisputed law of God. And, what better place to keep the ark, if we are to believe in the supernatural power of God, than in a nation that still practices the law of Moses(Falashas), to this very day? Perhaps the ark is their motivation for having maintained the Old Testament doctrine? Especially seeing the many times that Isreal had been invaded and provided a brief home to many pagan religions, during the reign of the kings. I think the conclusion, whether theoretical, hypothetical or factual, is quite clear. Good job!
Rating:
Summary: Interesting but far-fetched work
Review: Graham Hancock takes readers on a fantastic journey through the depths of time. His theory on the location of the Ark is plausible, but a lot of his explanations are not. Particularly bad is his theory that moses built the Ark using science from a lost Atlantean civilization. On the other hand he does an excellent job of portraing life in Ethiopia and the practices of Ethiopian religious groups. This would be very interesting for the comparative religion student. In short, Mr. Hancock asks some interesting and provactive questions, and answers them in a somewhat compelling way, but gets way too farfetched at times.
Rating:
Summary: Fascintating, but sloppy
Review: I found this book and exciting and stimulating read, and Hancock does his research well, as best I can tell. He leaves the reader with a great deal to think about, both in the biblical context of discovering what happened to the Ark, and in the Ethiopian context of the unusual reverence the Ethiopian Orthodox Church has for the Ark, and their claim to possess the original artifact. However readers should be forwarned that, as in all his other work I have read, Graham Hancock is willing to draw the most sensational conclusions from what appears to be very scanty evidence. He links his ideas together very poorly and often reasons from ealier conclusions that, while they seem reasonable, are never backed up fully. He has no single compelling piece of evidence, just a lot of suggestive ideas. Nontheless, it is an excellent read, and I highly recommend it. I just want to warn those who read it and feel 'all them historians and egyptologists is wrong, Graham Hancock knows the TRUTH' that he never proves any of his theories, and therefore as well as not being easy to dismiss, his ideas should not be too easily accepted.
Rating:
Summary: Not Indiana Jones! Fascinating tale.
Review: I learned quite a bit from this book. Many put books like this on the fringe but there is more to them than meets the eye. Try AREA 51 and its sequel by Robert Doherty also for some lighter and more exciting reading.
Rating:
Summary: Fun but flawed
Review: This book is a fun read, but not an archaelogical watershed. Mr. Hancock's accounts of his travels in Ethiopia, particularly to Lake Tana, were very interesting and entertaining. Mr. Hancock knows how to spin a good yarn (even if somewhat repetitive and disorganized) with tantalizing possibilities, but in the end they remain mere possibilities clamoring for proof. One problem is that Mr. Hancock relies in large part on the works of E.A. Wallis Budge, a former curator of the Egyption collection at the British Musuem, for accounts of the Ark and Egyptian legend. While one would suppose that Prof. Budge is a reliebale source, his turn-of-the-century writings are now largely discredited by modern Egyptologists as being based upon flawed and incorrect translations; in fact, it is likely that Budge did not even write many of the works attributed to him, but merely lent his name to the publication. Because at least one of Mr. Hancock's source materials is serioulsy undermined (and who knows about the rest), his analysis and conclusions are all the more shaky. I suggest that readers visit the University of Chicago Oriental Institute Museum website, particularly the recommended reading sections, for references to more reliable sources. Still, the book offers some interesting theories and may open the door to further, and perhaps more credible research by others. Readers would do well to read the footnotes and do a little digging on those sources. The problem, of course, is that so-called "pop" history like this is taken at face value by far too many people who claim that this is the "best" singular work on the subject they have read, or that this book finally makes sense of ancient mysteries. I would bet that most readers making such claims could also say that this is the *only* work they have read on the subject, or that their other studies were likewise limited to these sensationalistic theories. So take Mr. Hancock's work (all of his work, for that matter) with a grain of salt. He's fun, but so was Raiders of the Lost Ark, and no one took that as Gospel.
Rating:
Summary: Intelligently told adventure with only one drawback
Review: I would have given this book five stars if the publisher had the foresight to literally rip two chapters from the book. In the dead center of this lavishly told adventure, we hit a two chapter speedbump where the author spins a wild yarn about Moses as a mystical scientist and not a prophet. I'm not close-minded to such possibilities, but they belong in another book--some place where they won't weigh down a genuinely exciting intellectual quest. Otherwise, I applaud Hancock's fierce determination to uncover even the smallest shred of truth about the Ark, a fantastic artifact that has been lost too long. The book is actually a wonderful companion piece to "Raiders of the Lost Ark." Once you've smiled at that two-hour romp, get your mind around how the real adventure would go down. Chances are, you'll wonder how practical it would be to book a flight to Ethopia and see for yourself.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent, thought provoking
Review: This book I found highly interesting and thought provoking. Since reading it I have started studying the bible more closely than I have in the past, going beyond the KJV bible and looking into other translations. Mr. Hancocks conculsions might not be accepted by all, but his arguements are thoroughly thought out. Scholarship requires the continual quest of a searching mind, this book will have you wanting to dig more into the foundations of the religious past
|
