My mind this morning goes to two of my favorite writers: Immanuel Velikovsky and Graham Hancock. The question is: why are these two favorites of mine? (And, as usual, I apologize for writing this largely from the top of my head, and not doing the digging required to make this post better than it is.)
Immanuel Velikovsky (1895-1979) was born in Belarus, raised in Palestine, and spent many of his adult years in the United States. Like Marc Chagall, he was born in Vitebsk, and like Albert Einstein, he died in Princeton. He graduated from the University of Moscow’s medical school in 1921, moved to Berlin, edited and translated a number of books in Hebrew (including some written by the aforementioned Einstein) and was involved in the formation of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem. He was a practicing psychiatrist in Palestine for 15 years and, in 1939, came to the United States with his family to escape the looming war. He didn’t expect to stay too long, but he did.
He had started writing when in Palestine and continued as a full time writer in the United States. Some of his books, such as “Worlds in Collision” became big time best sellers.
He believed in catastrophe. By that, I mean that he believed that big movements in history were often the results of enormous, unexpected catastrophes. He believed in historic errors. By that, I mean that he believed that most historians did not search deep enough, did not go sufficiently outside the box, to see true history and, as a result, the history that we read has enormous gaps which, if known, would change our views of history. In trying to compensate for these large historical errors, he developed what came to be known as alternative histories. In proposing these alternative histories, Velikovsky did not simply write the equivalent of fantasy or even science fiction. His books were extraordinarily researched, and footnoted.
The above description is my description, not that of professional critics, most of whom pooh-pooh Velikovsky and everything he wrote. They are probably correct. But I don’t care.
Let me quote from Wikipedia on “Worlds in Collision”: “The book proposes that around the 15th century BCE, Venus was ejected from Jupiter as a comet or a comet-like object and subsequently passed near Earth…….In doing so, it changed Earth’s orbit and axial inclination, causing innumerable catastrophes which were identified in early mythologies and religious traditions from human civilizations around the world. Fifty two years later, it again made a close approach, stopping the Earth’s rotation for a while and causing more catastrophes…….The course of the planets stabilized over the centuries and Venus became a “normal” planet.”
In his other most well known book, “Ages in Chaos”, he rewrote history’s chronology – bringing together certain events (like the Exodus and the destruction of Egypt’s Middle Kingdom and others), which he said answered open questions about biblical history and about history as recorded by Herodotus.
He may have been wrong in everything he said. But his books are filled with references and proofs and so much more. Velikovsky was a brilliant man. And his books, right or wrong, open the mind of the reader to all sorts of possibilities, they spark interests in all sorts of arcane subject matter, they teach you that thinking outside the box can be illuminating. Take one of the two books I have mentioned (there are many others) and just give it a try, and I think you will see what I mean.
Now, let’s move on to Graham Hancock, still living, born in 1951.
Graham Hancock (and I say this without fear that I am overstating the case) wrote the best (for me) book that I have ever read: “The Sign and the Seal”. More than any other, I would ask you to read this book, published in 1992. It is absolutely brilliant, although – again – it may be totally incorrect.
Velikovsky and Hancock, I assume, personally have little in common. Velikovsky has a much broader education, knew more languages, was expert in Jewish tradition and history, knew the world’s mythologies and religions, had medical training and a scientific background. And he wasn’t afraid to show you how smart he was. Hancock has a much different approach, and I would expect him to have much more repressed personality. His books are not written in the “let me tell you all I know” fashion, but instead his books are books of discovery and you are accompanying him as he goes from one discovery to the next.
But his books are far from modest. “The Sign and the Seal” is the story of the Ark of the Covenant, the container that held the Ten Commandments, that was carried into battle by the ancient Israelites, and then housed in the Temple in Jerusalem. Until it disappeared.
When the Babylonians ransacked and destroyed the First Temple in Jerusalem in 586 BCE, the Jews kept a list of what was stolen, and the Babylonians kept a list of what they took. The two lists were virtually the same – no disagreement here. But what was missing from the two lists was the Ark of the Covenant. It appears that it was not taken to Babylon, and it wasn’t kept in Jerusalem, because – as you may know from the Bible – it was never heard from or seen again. What happened to it?
You may or may not know that the Ethiopian Christians have an answer to the question. They will tell you that it is hidden in the Church of St. Mary in the old Ethiopian capital of Axum, that it is guarded by high priests, and that you cannot see it. Period. This is a major tenet of the Ethiopian church.
Hancock assumed that this was simply a traditional belief, not supported by any facts, until one day, sitting in a cafe in Chartres, waiting for his wife to finish looking inside the cathedral, he began looking at the very detailed exterior carvings, and began a quest that convinced him that the Ark was in fact taken to Ethiopia – taken by the son of King Solomon and the Queen of Sheba, a young man named Menilek, through Egypt and today’s Sudan, hidden in a monastery on Lake Tana for 800 years before being moved further south. His story details the growth and history of the Ethiopian empire, its isolation amongst Muslim neighbors, its reconnection with other Christians during the Crusader years, and its re-isolation after the Christians were expelled. You learn about the Templars, about the connection between Ethiopian Christians and Portuguese navigators. You even learn about Scottish Freemasons and their involvement with the story of Ethiopia and the Ark.
Is any of this true? Many traditional religious figures and historians have expressed the strongest doubts about all of this, but – from what I have read – no one has yet proved Hancock wrong on any significant point.
But again – right or wrong – I don’t really care. It opens your eyes. As you probably know, there is an Ethiopian church in Jerusalem. You ever think how it got there? Did you know that one of Vasco da Gama’s sons was killed fighting with the Ethiopians against Muslims in the 16th century? Did you know that the monks at this island monastery in Lake Tana show where the Ark was hidden for 800 years? And so on, and so forth. (By the way, Hancock does not answer the question as to whether the Ark is now in the Church of St. Mary. He could not get beyond the guardian priests.)
Another of Hancock’s most well known books is “Fingerprints of the Gods”. Here he poses that many of the ancient civilizations of the world arose as outposts of the same even older civilization, that the similarities of customs and crafts was not all by chance. He poses that this old civilization was the victim of climate change – and that is was located in Antarctica and is now under miles of ice.
Far fetched? Perhaps. But again, it raises so many interesting points. And just today on my Google feed, I got an article from thearcheologist.org, entitled “Frozen Civilizations Found Under the Ice in Antarctica”. So don’t jump to conclusions too fast.
I find alternative history books fascinating in general for all the reasons set forth above, but – for alternative history – you just cannot beat Velikovsky and Hancock.
Art is 80 