By Region Books

I found this book while beginning research for a novel set in Britain around 60AD. Hutton's work here completely trashed my pre-conceived notions concerning a religious clash between the Celts and Romans in that period; and all I can say is, "Thank the Gods!" And no, I'm not being sarcastic - I'm not Wiccan or NeoDruidic or any of the multitude of New Age faiths, but I am a pantheist.

I had no idea so many of the sources of information I had been taught to believe were accurate are actually suspect. I am relieved that much of the romanticized notions I have heard over the last thirty years concerning stone age and Celtic religious beliefs and practices are fantastical extrapolations: I always found the fantasies to be a little too pat and convenient in their support of Twentieth Century political agendas and concepts. I love that the archeological record paints an incomplete picture of people that were not living in some lock-step, religion-ruled utopia, but who were seemingly as different, unique, and opinionated as free-thinking people are today - they could barely bury two people the same way twice, and they chose from hundreds of Gods.

Hutton's take on it comes across as wonderful and welcome militant agnosticism (I don't know, and you don't either). He writes with great thoroughness, and often displays a fine sense of dry wit. I am not concerned about his respect, or lack thereof, for people and their beliefs in this century or the last: I am grateful to him for showing the utmost respect for the Pagans of the British Isles by saying with great clarity what they did not say; and thus removing the words that others have falsely put in their mouths.

Agreeing with D.P. Birkett's review below, the greatest strength of this book (and it has many) is that it can stand as a model of how a scholar with integrity can not only give you the facts about a subject but can also discuss - fairly and rigourously - what others (scholars and non-scholars) have said before. Hutton scrupulously gives credit where it is due, even to writers with whom (on other points) he utterly disagrees. This is scholarship at its best, and if only more books were written in this manner (ie. diligently finding out what IS known, and not distorting or going beyond the facts), we would all be intellectually better off.
Highly recommended.

I found this to be a very informative book. The author presents what was know about the various time periods in Great Britian, states clearly that any further interpretation is best guess on anyone's parts, and presents both the archeological data, the guesses of academia and the guesses of intuitives. A very all around approach to the subject.

I don't think I could add much to the reviews. This is a marvelous work, and a good antidote to the more common "newage" (rhymes with "sewage") books churned out by the thousands on the beliefs of the pre-Christian inhabitants of the British Isles. MAKE your neo-pagan friends read this! Tie them down and read it to them if you have to!

As a practising pagan of several years now, I'm rather disappointed by the review that dashes this work and author out of hand with a curt, "he must be a Christian" followed by a stream of rhetoric. No, this book isn't the fuzzy little love-love story that pagandom has been inundated with, and the world is the greater for it.

Ronald Hutton IS actually well versed in pagan traditions as an academic, if not a practitioner, having attended numerous pagan celebrations in the U.K. and actually pursuing pagan history as a personal interest (over what the establishment might deem as more suitable research topics). His degree of scholarship is apparent throughout this work. Archaeologically and historically (or prehistorically, if you will), this work is comprehensive and current, quite an eye-opener to those who have been bombarded with outdated archaeology/anthropology on the one hand and romantic mythology dressed as fact on the other.

Although parts of this book are dry, that is more a comment on the material than on the author himself. Containing numerous priceless diagrams and sketches, this book is a virtual treasure trove. This is the Number One book on my ample bookshelves for its history and applicability to my understanding of my own religious tradition.

I would highly recommend it to both academics and to pagans seeking a better comprehension of what has gone before (without the fluff and filler). For a more modern history of current paganism, try the author's Triumph of the Moon. For more great history/prehistory, try Ellis' The Celtic Empire, Barry Raftery's Pagan Celtic Ireland, Dillon's and Chadwick's Celtic Realms, Harding's European Societies in the Bronze Age and Whittle's Europe in the Neolithic.

I really savored every page of this book. One of the best I have EVER read on both an OVERVIEW of american prehistory, and american archaeology. Addresses all the important questions, and most importantly to me, the author seems very unbiased. At FIRST i thought he was going to be definitely a Pro-Native American viewpoint, since Prof. Vine Deloria wrote the foreward. However, although the authoer is PC, he is in such a way as not to be "in your face" with it. I think a very balanced book. I will keep my copy handy and refer to it often, as it is a truly VALUABLE resource! I understand more of the political ramification so of the government vs the Indians now, and the author told it in a way so as not to bore you to tears. Very well done, and my sincere, heartfelt compliments to the author, for a job well done.

Dr. Thomas' discussion on pages 57-58 of the Army Medical Museum's role in collecting human remains is misleading. The Museum (now the National Museum of Health & Medicine) was established in 1862, during the American Civil War, to begin the study of military medicine and surgery in wartime. It was not established at the urging of Professor Agassiz. US Army Surgeon General Hammond's orders pertained specifically to collecting the remains of Union and Confederate soldiers, who were overwhelmingly white, to study surgery before the era of x-rays or aseptic surgery. Thousands of specimens were sent into the Museum, including General Daniel Sickles' leg, which he personally had shipped after it was struck by a cannon ball and amputated. The specimens were studied and used to compile the six-volume study, The Medical and Surgical History of the War of the Rebellion. After the war, the Museum did expand its collecting focus and collected Indian anthropological artifacts and remains. The artifacts were deposited with the Smithsonian Institution, based on an agreement the Smithsonian proposed in 1869. Human remains were transferred to the Medical Museum, where they were kept and studied side by side with those of American soldiers. The Museum continued collecting Native American remains until the late nineteenth century when the role was returned to the Smithsonian Institution, where it remains today.

The star rating was insisted on by Amazon's computer - this note only pertains to Dr. Thomas' pages on the Army Medical Museum.

Michael Rhode, Archivist
National Museum of Health & Medicine

I wouldn't even assume Chatters was simply foolish; I'd assume he did a racist snow job worthy of Broca himself. He basically compared East Asian features to Kennewick man, said "no", and then decided it was Caucasian, ignoring some very important differences between American Indians and East Asians.

Let's first look at the stereotypes: Cradleboard compression, arthritis, and presence of all teeth. Wouldn't it be BLINDINGLY obvious that arthritis and dental problems weren't really a problem traditionally, just like how sickle-cell is a side effect for defense against malaria? And cradleboard compression similarly is a cultural, and therefore Lamarckian, trait.

On to the cephalic, or cranial index. First developed as a way to "explain away" such annoyingly inconvenient groups as Buryats and Mongols, who had larger - but broader - heads than Caucasians. (And they still couldn't explain groups like the Xhosa, Iroquois, and Eskimos.) Not that it matters; it varies widely in Europe, brachycrania occuring more in Finland, Lappland, and much of southern Europe, and a mixture of meso- and dolichocrania occurring more in the rest of Europe. East Asian groups are more likely brachycranic. In the Americas, you get a much different picture: Iroquois and Eskimos, as I mentioned. North America's generally dolicho- or mesocranic, while Central America's generally brachycranic, and South America's generally dolichocranic. (Of course, that's all assuming it's heritable.) I'd even say that plains Indians might be more dolichocranic; remember, most of the remains from that time spent their infancy on the cradleboard.

Chatters also describes the gnathic index, which is quite funny, since most forensic reconstruction books tell you a prognathous face is rarely Caucasian. Oh, and the bigots of the 19th century track prognathism as a Bad Thing, which means it can't be very common in Caucasians.

He then describes a number of other "And that's a problem because..." traits that make me wonder if he's ever seen an Indian (a long, broad nose, for example), as well as traits which are a compilation of several traits (Turner's patterns, where Turner prematurely marked Indians as sinodont without any studies).

But Chatters is a soft-liner: Loring Brace effectively ruled Indians descendants of Neanderthals as a result.

On the other hand, Skull Wars showed that one in a thousand anthropologists who have heard of Kennewick man isn't a Thor Heyerdahl wannabe.

Though I wish he'd tell that the Bering Strait theory was unanimously agreed to even before Vitus Bering was born, based on a tortured interpretation of Aztec history. It was NEVER tested.

As an author myself, one of the kindest remarks about my work was paid by a detractor. She had written that "Davis' words may be factual, but they are biting, irreverent and at a total disregard for social ideals.." "Skull Wars" puts me in mind of this same quote, only I am hardly a detractor. Thomas's style IS biting. His "no holds bared, this is the plain truth" writing may well ruffle some eurocentric feathers. And it may well upset more than a few Arianists. So what? His work is direct, lucid, and to the point. His willingness, and in some areas blatant will for the disregard for political correctness must be applauded. This is a great bit of writing. Period. In an age of "warm and fuzzy, let's all get along at any cost", too many Americans have forgotten (or are ignorant of) the bloody history of our forefathers. I have often remarked that the Native people's biggest mistake was not burning those three ships right into the sea.

This is an excellnt example of an interesting page turner brimming with facts in favor of social-political agendas. A must for all historians.

This book is one of the better discussions of the issue, and far more factual than the arrant nonsense published by James Chatters. If anything, David Hurst Thomas errs only in trying to be fairer to certain of the current generation of scientists than they deserve. The truth is that there was never really any doubt over the direct genetic relationship between PaleoIndians like Kennewick Man & their modern Native American descendants, and that this has always been a purely political fight over control of ancient human remains... seen by the descendants as ?ancestors? to be protected, but viewed by scientists as ?research material? to fuel their careers with. (Several of the plaintiff scientists have even admitted that they had been searching for a legal ?test case? for years, hoping to gut NAGPRA. And their behavior was calculated to raise the hackles of local tribes & prevent any NAGPRA sanctioned study. They didn?t even TRY asking tribal permission under NAGPRA guidelines)

PaleoIndians & Native Americans share the same mtDNA haplogroups (which are found at low levels in Asia & the Pacific, & virtually nonexistant elsewhere). Craniometrically, some PaleoIndians (Buhl Woman, Wizard?s Beach Man, etc) show close affinities to modern Native Americans, the others don?t closely match anybody but show general affinities to Native American, Beringian, SE Asian, & Pacific populations. The largest & most comprehensive PaleoIndian craniometric study to date (Powell & Neves? ?Craniofacial Morphology of the First Americans?, from the American Journal of Physical Anthropology) determined that PaleoIndians overall DID match up with modern Native Americans, with the differences falling within the range of known evolutionary processes such as genetic drift. Linguistic & genetic studies of modern Native Americans reveal that their ancestors arrived here LONG before the PaleoIndian era (Linguistics says 30,000+ years, DNA says 20,000-40,000+ years).

Yet strangely, none of this is mentioned by scientists prominent in the Kennewick debacle. Instead, people WITHOUT biology degrees make false pronouncements about DNA, people without physical anthropology degrees (or who have them & should know better) make false & stereotypical pronouncements about craniometrics, and so on. You have the noted C.Loring Brace (a several times past director of the American Eugenics Society) claiming that ?all? Indians craniometrically match Asians such as Chinese (when his ?only? match turns out to involve one group of related tribes commonly thought to be late arrivals, and geographically nearest to Asia to boot... hence most subject to later geneflow). And he has been quoted by reporters as speaking of ?mongoloid invaders who exterminated the caucasoid first arrivals?. Other scientists speak of ?caucasoid? looking PaleoIndians, WITHOUT mentioning that these same traits are found among various modern & historical Native American tribes, and WITHOUT mentioning that rather than being typical only of ?Caucasoids? (they actually show up in ASIA before they are found in Europe), these traits are common among various Asian & Pacific populations... and are even found among some African groups! Much hooraw was made in the papers of mtDNA ?haplogroup X? as a link between ?ancient Americans? & Europeans, but it was rarely noted that the haplogroup is MORE common in the Near East than it is in Europe, and that it is also found in North Africa, Asia Minor, India, and SIBERIA?. and that the European haplogroup lineages form a DIFFERENT sub-clade than do the Native American ones, and have been phylogenetically shown to NOT be ancestral to them. Numerous scientists claimed that modern Indians didn?t possess the same head shapes as did PaleoIndians, stereotyping PaleoIndians as being narrowheaded (dolichocranic) & modern Native Americans as broadheaded (brachycranic), despite the fact that some PaleoIndians (like Marmes Rockshelter) were brachycranic & MANY modern Indians (including the majority of those east of the Mississippi & on the Northern Plains, & many South American Indians) were narrowheaded & that brachycranic Indians were actually in the minority overall! Scientists have quoted Christy Turner's old claim that all Native Americans possessed Sinodont dental patterns, like NE Asians, & did NOT match PaleoIndian dental patterns...when in reality Turner was shown to be mistaken, numerous Indian tribes have been shown to be Sundadont, or intermediate, and PaleoIndians have been shown to possess traits found in BOTH Sinodont & Sundadont populations. This suggests that either PaleoIndians arrived BEFORE Sinodonty evolved (~20,000 BP), or that they were a mix of peoples possessing both dental patterns.

Worse yet, while prominent scientists have shown themselves more than willing to make wild claims regarding PaleoIndians & Native Americans, even BEFORE study is conducted... they have not been as willing to offer correction when actual studies subsequently prove them wrong. Whether speaking of Kennewick, Penon Woman, or Lagoa Santa, the scientific craniometric truth behind their appearance has generally received less coverage than the ?pre-game speculation?.

Digressing a bit, I should note that I feel it helps if reviewers first had a good grasp of the facts. A prime example is the anonymous reviewer from Bogart, Georgia, who makes makes several glaring errors. ?Bogart? speaks of ?Caucasoid skeletal remains?, when PaleoIndians have been clearly shown to NOT be Caucasoid... merely to possess certain traits called ?proto-Caucasoid? by some researchers, and more accurately (given where they first evolved) called ?proto-MONGOLOID? by others. (A point to mention is that these self same traits are found in Australian Aborigines... hardly an indication of any ?Caucasoid? connection).

?Bogart? also claims that ?ancient artifacts? (& possibly the purportedly Caucasoid remains, his phrasing is a bit vague) ?predate the fabled land-bridge to Siberia in the last ice age?... yet the midpoint of the landbridge's existance (the last Glacial Maximum) predates the oldest proven archaeological site in the Americas (Monte Verde) by at least 7,000 years, it's first appearance is even earlier. For that matter, no landbridge was needed. The Bering strait can be WALKED over during most winters, when the ice freezes, and there is also evidence that humans in the Pacific had boats capable of crossing that distance well over 60,000 years ago.

?Bogart? also fatuously speaks of these purported ?remains & and ancient artifacts? as having more in common with ancient sites in Europe ?than with anything Asian or typically Native American?. The problem with this is that the oldest remains in the Americas match up with Pacific & East Asian peoples, NOT with Europeans (see various craniometric studies, particularly those of Joseph Powell or Walter Neves). (For that matter, the oldest ?anatomically modern?, or ?non-neanderthal?, human remains in Europe are actually a closer match to MODERN Native Americans than they are to modern Europeans, according to C. Loring Brace?s own data! It is likely relevant that genetic studies indicate major population replacements in Europe since the time of these first settlers).

As for artifacts, Clovis era artifacts have been tied to ?ancient European? peoples (i.e., ?Solutreans?) only by those with lots of theory but little fact to support it, or by those naively parroting them. The purported Solutrean tie has been discounted as a superficial similarity, differing on more points that it matches, by the ACTUAL Solutrean experts such as Lawrence Guy Straus. And pre-Clovis lithic artifacts in the Americas (Monte Verde, Cactus Hill, Topper, Meadowscroft, etc) are typically unifacial rather than Solutrean or Clovis type bifacials, and have been stated by the excavators of those sites to have NO similarity to Solutrean lithic industries.

?Bogart? says that Native Americans ?may not be the earliest immigrants to the Americas?, exposing ignorance... or bias... or wishful thinking... in one fell swoop. Currently, ALL evidence (DNA, linguistic, craniometric, lithic, etc) points to modern Native Americans as being descended from the earliest known inhabitants of the Americas. In those cases where claims of biological discontinuity have been espoused, closer scrutiny finds only inaccurate or out of context data behind such claims.

So for example, ?Bogart? erroneously states that ?DNA is found among some groups of "Native Americans" that matches a strand found only in Europe?. He is speaking of mitochondrial haplogroup X, which back at the time of the initial Kennewick furor was widely reported in the popular press (having been planted there by anthropologists & archaeologists WITHOUT biology degrees) as being a ?European? haplogroup totally absent from Asia. Nothing could be further from the truth (read actual scientific journal articles like Smith et al?s ?Distribution of mtDNA haplogroup X among Native North Americans? in the American Journal of Physical Anthropology, or Reidla et al?s ?Origin and Difusion of mtDNA haplogroup X? in the American Journal of Human Genetics). Even at the time of the initial reports in the press it was known that haplogroup X was MORE COMMON & more diverse in the Near East, & that Native Americans had the same overall frequency of it as did Europeans (negating any thought of their having obtained it from ?partial ancient European? ancestry), and that the Native American & European lineages came from DIFFERENT sub-clades of haplogroup X. And rather than ?absent? in Asia, it had for the most part NOT YET BEEN LOOKED FOR in that region. One of the first direct attempts to search for it turned it up among a Siberian population (again, at the same level as in Europe & North America). Subsequent studies found it to be even further ranging (India, Africa, etc). For anyone to call it a ?European? haplogroup today is as misleading as it would be to call black hair merely a ?European? trait, despite it?s being MORE common in other parts of the world that predate the settlement of Europe.

I highly recommend this book. But I also recommend visiting your local university library, or searching the internet, for copies of scientific journal articles dealing with DNA (most of this is NOT available from other sources) & linguistics & archaeology & Ice Age conditions. By neccessity, ANY single book simplifies or glosses over certain things, without ample background, the reader can be inadvertantly misled. Other useful books would be Thomas Dillehay?s ?The Settlement of the Americas.? Sadly, more detailed books like those edited by Robson Bonnichsen of the Center for the Study of the First Americans are chronically out of print, poorly described (?conference proceedings? that DON?T say when the conference took place, or books that don?t give publication dates allowing you to determine whether they might be outdated or not, etc) or are unreasonably delayed in publication. But if you can find a copy, ?Ice Age Peoples of North America? is a good read. If it ever comes out (delayed twice already), ?PaleoAmerican Origins? promises to contain invaluable information.

I had hoped to learn of the way of life of the 5300-corpse found in a glacier in the Alps. Instead there was the story of the conflicts and struggles of the scientists exploiting him. There is a small kernel of Iceman information, but it must be dug out, as he was.

I started reading about the Ice Man when he was first discovered a number of years ago. This book is so informative and interesting and shows that even in the "adult" scientific world men and women can and do act like children. I always believed that mankind had great abilities from the beginning of time and I think the age of this corpse shows just how completely wrong anthropologists have been regarding their "theories" over the years about early man. This is a must read book. Kathleen Wyatt

Brenda Fowler's training as a journalist pays a handsome reward in this thoroughly-researched and well-written account of Ötzi's discovery on September 21, 1991, his well-intentioned but badly flawed recovery, and his archaeological importance, as well as the academic, political, legal, and financial intrigue (almost always petty) taking place behind the scenes.

For eight years, Fowler interviewed everyone involved with Ötzi to uncover the truth about the sometimes misreported and confusing "facts" published in the media. She also has taken a discerning look at the various personalities involved: from the austere Konrad Spindler (who became the main spokesperson concerning Ötzi--and the main recipient of the financial rewards) to the Simons (who first found the body and later wanted to be paid for their discovery) to Klaus Oeggl, a young German botanist, whose brilliant studies of Ötzi countered Spindler's own (fairly unscientific) theory.

Her hard work clearly shows: this is as much an archaeological mystery (set both in the Copper Age and the modern scientific world) as it is a record of the facts and speculations about an archaeological wonder named Ötzi. I highly recommend this book. You won't stop turning the pages--and when you're done. you'll want to go visit Ötzi at his Bolzano, Italy home.

Eleven chapters, a prologue and epilogue, as well as detailed notes, a lengthy bibliography, and a thorough index. 313 pages, with 33 black and white photo plates inserted in the center of the book. The photos show Ötzi, his accessories, and many of the personalities described in the book. These are not National Geographic quality photos, but that's not the point of Fowler's book. You won't go wrong by reading it.

Otzi, the frozen cadaver now residing in a museum in Bolzano, Italy, was discovered by hikers in the glacial ice of the Tyrolean Alps, in 1991. He'd been there a long time - roughly 5300 years - undisturbed until global warming revealed his presence to the curious. The discovery has been of enormous value to archaeologists, since in addition to his well-preserved male corpse, Otzi's clothes, shoes, and "tool kit" has provided a wealth of info about bronze-age inhabitants of the region.

Note, please, that I specified the "Tirolean" Alps. I've had the privilege of living in Merano, in the Italian "occupied zone" of Tyrol, where the dialect called Romansch is in fact an ancient German. Austria and Italy have quarreled over the Tyrol since the Renaissance, and the current disposition of the border is a result of pan-European meddling, from the Sudtiroler's point of view. This quarrel was revivified by the exglaciation of Otzi; the squabble over the precise location of his discovery and the ultimate possession of his remains is one of the chief subjects of this journalistic book. The second focus of the book is the melee that took place between archaeologists over the right to study Otzi and his effects. That's not entirely a pretty story, but hey! scientists are human and have careers to foster. General analysis of what Otzi has to "say" about his life and times forms a distant third topic. I'd have preferred more of the latter, but the book would have been unmarketably brief.

I carried this book in a dry-bag in my kayak on an expedition into the glacial fiords of Patagonia. As it turned out, I had only a few minutes per day to read before darkness, so I had to finish it on an airplane. It wouldn't have blended well with my thoughts while kayaking anyway, thoughts which were centered on Otzi and his fate rather than on any contemporary human business. "Ice is nice, and would suffice" said Robert Frost. Wouldn't it be an elegant fate to be entombed in ice for the hikers of 7300 AD to discover? Suicide by glacier! A typical Swede, I hate to be tended. I could willingly wait until 7300 AD to have anyone meddle with my body.

Such were my thoughts at moments, gaping up at the glaciers of Torres del Payne, but these thoughts were whisked aside by the blue-haired beauty of the ice. Fortunately I also had three iPods along, loaded with Bach, Monteverdi, and Ockeghem. If Otzi had been so equipped, he might also have been determined to live longer.

One year ago I read this book, transfixed by the writing. Fowler clearly got the science of the subject material better than "The Man in the Ice" (which I bought as soon as it came out.)

As an engineer, and student of the development of both the sciences and the technologies, it is often amazing how little purity exists in new developments. Certainly, if one of the large projects - I've been on a few with international media coverage - is analyzed from the inside, it looks VERY different than the media hype or soundbites.

Fowler wrote a book so filled with hooks that it will affix itself to anyone with a scintilla of curiosity, but whether she consciously considered this or not, her result was not only the history of one man dying high on a mountain glacier several thousand years ago and how he lived, but the story of how WE live in the same environs NOW, and how institutions of science can be rendered impotent by their own internal dynamics as amplified by the various needs of individual researchers.

The Iceman's society was clearly fragmented and very rudimentary. There is no way to know if he even had much of a language, but we who live in the 21st century have benefitted from thousands of years of written history, the development of science, technology, and government/society... and, quite frankly, we almost botched this incredible discovery.

It's a wonder that the Iceman wasn't sold to a rendering plant and turned into food pellets for mad cows!

I guess if you don't want to know anything about the present state of our world society and why people would even BE in that area now, this would be pretty disrupting to you. It would require skimming through many pages of 'inconsequential' information to get what you'd really want: a time travel experience without knowledge of the society that produced the time machine or the technology of the time machine itself.

It's rare enough to find a book that GETS the story of a present day development correctly, but one that gets the overall structure of something like Iceman... is... well, almost as rare as the Icemen himself.

"The First Americans" is a very good introduction to the problems and latest theories relating to the peopling of the Americas. James Adovasio was the principal archaeologist at Meadowcroft Rockshelter, in Pennsylvania, for many years, and it was there that he conducted some of the most careful excavations since the beginning of scientific archaeology. Unfortunately the world was not ready to accept his findings, which were first expounded in the 1970s and stated that people arrived in the Americas much earlier than previously thought - long before the existence of Clovis spear points and before people could have emigrated across the Bering Land Bridge. However, something interesting happened in the closing years of the 20th century: the growing acceptance that the Monte Verde site in South America did indeed predate North American Clovis sites caused a crisis within the archaeological community. While this crisis is not completely settled, it is now generally accepted that maritime peoples travelling the coasts of the Americas arrived at some period before 10,000 BC - well before the start of Clovis culture. This book recounts this controversy from its beginnings in the 19th century right up until the start of the 21st century, and is a wonderful resource for both the general reader, and archaeologists whose specialities are in other time periods. Although it is extremely didactic at times, such as in its explanation of the usefulness of the Carbon 14 dating method, it is still extremely informative and a great book. As a professional archaeologist not trained in the Pre-Clovis/Paleoindian time period, I have not only found this book to be useful in my own forays into this era of prehistory, I literally could not put the book down. I enjoyed every minute of it, and recommend it to anyone wanting to learn about the earliest Americans!

I found The First American an easy and enjoyable read about early Native Americans. It is not for the professional but for serious amateurs interested in the human development of North America. It shows the strong opinions of the major archeologist involved in this search. The author also has strong opinion but takes care to keep fact and opinions separated. Most people would enjoy the book.

As a young science, archaeology is necessarily dynamic. New discoveries, fresh insights, novel concepts emerge with almost dizzying frequency. Science is supposed to work on hypothesis testing - evidence confirms or refutes ideas. To discover that entrenched dogmas have been established, battlelines drawn and still contested, careers launched and destroyed is disheartening. To realise that the issue centres on a few stone tools renders the situation almost ludicrous - until we remember archaeology is the study of humanity. And humans, as Adovisio points out vividly, can cling tenaciously to favoured ideas - particularly those concerning humanity.

Adovasio briefly relates the African origins and distribution of humanity across the globe. However, this story truly starts with the 1937 discovery of some finely crafted stone spearpoints in New Mexico. Debate over Indians as "noble savage" or "barbarous native" was sharply interrupted by this find. The workmanship and novel design of the "Clovis Points" demanded reconsideration of Native Americans - particularly of their origins and dispersal in the Western Hemisphere. Knowledge of the extent of the massive glaciers covering North American many millennia ago left but a small time window for Asian peoples to cross the Bering land bridge exposed during the glacial period. Who were these people? Adovasio asks. When did they arrive? How long did it take them to inhabit the hemisphere? What was their environmental impact?

All these questions have been asked for many years. Adovasio's own research made a significant contribution when he excavated a rockshelter at Meadowcroft, Pennsylvania. Artefacts there were dated to a time far earlier than the Last Glacial Maximum [LGM] of just over eleven thousand years ago. Other sites, most notably the Monte Verde site in Chile have added data positing an earlier emigration from the Old World to the New. All this new information has challenged the dogma of "Clovis" being the "earliest Americans". It's not just an academic debate, Adovasio points out. Questions of site selection, investigation, testing procedures, retention of artefacts and human remains have all be raised. Indeed, with the Native American Graves Protection and Preservation Act [NAGPRA] some of these issues have been enshrined in law. He examines all the issues in exquisite detail, readily dismissing the more bizarre, such as the contention that the Western Hemisphere is the cradle of all humanity. Data must not only support or demolish dogma, it must support or demolish poorly conceived law.

Adovasio's narrative becomes vigorously polemical at times. His stridency is forgiven when you recall he's spent three decades of defenders of the Clovis Bar shutting their minds to evidence - his and that of others. Although this is hardly an academic study, his assemblage of evidence and logic underpinning his assertions is a standard that any researcher would do well to review. He gives Paul Martin's "Pleistocene blitzkrieg" of the new human arrivals a thorough airing, but rejects it. In Adovasio's view, it was the climate or disease that drove the large fauna extinct, not human hunting. He examines a wide variety of emigration scenarios, including the "coastal enclave" idea, in explaining how this Hemisphere was populated. He admits defeat in selecting any one, but declares the first humans arrived here before the LGM. Only from that basis, he argues, can we establish not only when humans occupied this region, but how.

This book is both a scholarly and entertaining read. Adovasio builds his case well, even adding cartoons to his collection of photographs and diagrams. Instead of footnotes, he provides per-chapter references, a nuisance to the novice in this topic. [stephen a. haines - Ottawa, Canada]

Humans are a curious lot. Here that curiosity is directed toward the prehistory of humans in the Americas. When did people get to North America? Where did they come from? What were they like? This book by a guy who has been involved in these questions all his professional life. And he knows many of the other professionals engaged in the same quest. He knows their work, and their prejudices. And most important, how they view his own work.

This makes for a lively read indeed. This is a no-holds barred, Watson's Double Helix, view of the current archaeological scene. There are some pretty colorful characters here, and Adovasio has clearly had a good time getting his licks in.

The history of the key digs, and the arguments with the Clovis first guys are vividly presented, and I enjoyed every bit of it. It amazes me, though, that after a century or so of the pursuit of answers, how little data has actually turned up. There seems to be only a couple of handfuls of informative sites, with only a few bones, some broken rocks, and not much else. Everything is questioned, at least somewhat plausibly, by someone. Confusion and chaos, lots of conjecture, and not enough money.

The book has a reasonably good index, a terrific bibliography, no footnotes, and lots of pictures (hooray!).

This investigation is clearly only its earliest stages of development, with an awful lot to be discovered yet. New techniques for going after the data will yet be developed, no doubt, and the coming decades will see more revolutions yet. I can't wait to see what comes next. I hope Adovasio is around to write about it.

This is a well written book that held my interest. It gives the story of Meadowcroft from the archeologist responsible for its excavation, and places it in the context of American archeological history and the author's own biography. While I wonder what the "other side" would have to say about it, the author makes a compelling case for the truth of his perspective, at the expense of his detractors. I recommend it.

If you are wondering what to read about the Celts, with little previous exposure to the subject, then you only need to know one thing: "The Ancient Celts" by Barry Cunliffe. In fact, forget about this review and just buy it now, it is that good. I am not joking! Go. Now. Why are you still reading???

Since you persist, you will find "The Ancient Celts" to be a thorough going introduction to most aspects of Celtic research and history. Cunliffe gives a broad overview of previous Celtic study, the sources and the different influences and prejudices that have wormed their way into the sources and works through history. This provides an excellent back-drop to Cunliffe's own book, and puts it into an historical context of scholarship.

For the Celts themselves, the book presents broad overviews of different aspects of Celtic society, culture, art and so on. This is necessarily brief and focuses on those Celtic peoples who are amply attested to. For those others who dwelt more on the fringes of Celtic territory, Cunliffe is rightly more cautious in the few conclusions he draws. Despite this, the treatment is reasonably detailed and will certainly give you enough to go further should you wish to do so.

This might sound a bit puerile, but another bonus for me was the ample supply of photos, pictures and diagrams that helped put a more visual facet on the text. One might think that this is a pretty banal comment, but I found it a real boon to be able to see the artifacts that Cunliffe refered to, and appreciate them for myself. The Celtic art was a classic example of this.

For those with little geographical knowledge of Europe, I have only one quibble about the book: the paucity of maps. Cunliffe uses a few geographical features, like rivers, which are less than famous. A map or two would have been fantastic for placing events in their proper location. This is just a small point which does nothing to detract from the book in its entirety.

While there are other authors out there, I would agree that Cunliffe has achieved possibly the best introduction available on the Celts. If you have not already got it ordered, I suggest you do so now. It is a great book and you won't regret the purchase.

For anyone wanting an understanding of the Celtic people, Cunliffe's "The Ancient Celts" is an excellent introduction, as well as a fine review for those with a foundation in Celtic history. Cunliffe gives us a picture of the Ancient Celts from 1300 BC forward. The Celts had a most fascinating and expansive culture, dominating much of Europe up until the time of the Roman conquests. Following the Roman conquests of Europe and the Celtic lands, Celtic society faced the onslaught of Christianity which crushed some of the Celtic culture and absorbed other parts thereof. Still the spirit of the Celts survives even today... for those that know where to seek it.

As a student of Celtic Theology, I found Cunliffe's chapter on `Religious Systems' to be most interesting, but as Irish scholar Proinsias MacCana has described it Celtic religious beliefs are a "fertile chaos". There is a wide array of material reflecting the beliefs of the Celts, all of which offers us insight into their spirit and none of which fully explains it. Still, Cunliffe has done an admirable job in his explanation thereof in "The Ancient Celts".

Caesar (in "Commentaries on the Gallic War") writes that the Celts were extremely superstitious. This may be the case, but I feel that what Caesar calls superstition is nothing more than the `faith of the Celts'. One never sees superstition in one's own religion, only in the belief and practices of others.

Within the Celtic society religion was mediated by the Druids. These were the Celtic priests, but much more than mere teachers of religion, the Druids were the keepers of knowledge of the Celtic people. Also within this religious class were the `Faithi' or the seers ~ those who were inspired by the Gods to understand the `otherworld'.

Today the Celtic religious festivals survive in the forms of Samain (Halloween), Imbolc, and Lugnasad to name but a few. These and other rites were officiated at by the Druids.

I believe that the `path of the Druid' and an oneness with nature is an essential element for those who would learn the way of the Celts.

Although we tend to think of the Celtics as being centralized in the British Isles, it is important to note that the Celts established settlements across Europe into even Western Asia. Furthermore, it must not be forgotten that the Celts served to slow and curtail the expansion of Rome.
Cunliffe's "The Ancient Celts" reveals the Celtic people to be of a poetic / warrior society which contributed greatly to the development of the soul of the European nations of today. Even today in television advertisement (for travel to Ireland) we see Ireland being described as a land of warrior-poets.

In a warrior society the way of the warrior contributes to the development of religion and religion contributes to the morality of the warrior. This combination of warrior ethos and religious faith make for greater equality within the society itself.

Cunliffe states: "Women clearly occupied a more significant position in Celtic society than they did in the Greco-Roman world..." Women in the Celtic Society have had a good deal of input into the development and working of that society, and this shapes the society in ways that are simply not present in a purely male-dominated society (i.e. Arab-Muslim society).
It is also interesting to note that although Celtic society may have been overshadowed by both the Romans and later by the Christian Church there is still a strong Celtic influence in modern society.

Overall, I found Cunliffe's "The Ancient Celts" to be a very interesting book, serving to build a good foundational knowledge of our Celtic heritage.

Wonderful book, Cunliffe is a well-known scholar who's an expert on celtic archeology, and has been in numerous television shows and documentaries. Wonderful author, well written, and indepth. He shows you the archeology, and what it could've meant, but leaving enough room for you to draw your own conclusions. I loved the chapter "Religious Systems" as it's very informative, and solid in the archeological record. Love it, love it, love it. I fully intend to re-read it next year to see if I re-learn what I've learned. There's just so much information in this book, that it warrants another read!

Although this book has a lot of interesting information and photos, it it so tediously written and so focused on specific archeological finds that it was very disappointing overall. There was very little "overview information" about the Celtic lifestyle. If you want a lot of archeological detail this book is for you. But if you are looking for a more general book with information about the Celtic lifestle you will never make it through this textbook-like work.

The pictures are beautiful, showing many unusual pieces, but the content is often only school-book level, with little in-depth analysis or contextualizing. I found myself wishing for more information, and a deeper, more serious treatment of the cullture, the beliefs, and the everyday life of the people.

It's jammed to the gills with information (with a heavy emphasis on pharaonic building projects and dynastic politics; enough about workers and workers' villages to be tantalizing; I wish there were more). I'm not competent to assess how far out of date it is with regard to the Third Intermediate Period, as one reader has charged above. (Most general readers won't care about the Third Intermediate Period one way or the other.) It's been commended for its lucidity by several readers here; but I thought Grimal had an annoying habit of changing the subject without sufficient warning; and the exposition is some times less than completely clear (in part from a penchant of the author for cramming every sentence with information, much of it tangential to the main point). Most infuriating of all was the lack of a single good map of all important Egyptian sites (from Lower Egypt to upper, and on into Nubia for that matter). I had to go to Cyril Aldred's book on Ancient Egypt for an adequate map. Despite these minor flaws, I recommend this book as an excellent survey for an interested non-specialist, like me.

This is a well-written book and the English translation is excellent. But it needs to be said that this is a history of Egyptian pharaohs with a particular emphasis on power struggles and building projects. The pharaonic succession is recounted in detail, and the layout of several temples and monuments is presented in the text and the figures.

Other aspects of ancient Egyptian society, such as the organisation of the economy, administration, law, the military, the hieroglyphs or religious beliefs and worldviews are not even mentioned in this book. All topics involving the ordinary people of Egypt have been ignored.

As a result, this book takes a very narrow look at ancient Egypt when it focuses exlusively on dynastic politics and archeological monuments. There's nothing wrong with that, but in my opinion a more suitable title for this book would have been 'A history of Egyptian pharaohs and their buildings'

This may well be the best history of Ancient Egypt ever written. I bought it in 5th grade, when we studied Egypt for the first time, and I will always use it. I used my first copy so much that it fell apart, and I had to buy a new one. If you can only read one history of Egypt, make it this one.

Seeking a solid overview of Ancient Egyptian history, I chose this book on the strong recommendations of Amazon readers. I was not disappointed. While the book is a bit dated (the English edition came out in 1992), it was more than adequte. Grimal presents a detailed history of Egypt from predynastic times through the conquest of Alexander, focusing on relgion, economics and society as well as political history.

The chapters on the Old and New Kingdom were particularly strong - the interrelationship of politics and religion were very clearly written. The chaptes on the first and second intermediate periods and the Middle Kingdom were more diffucult for me to follow, although that may be more a function of my lack of familiarity than the fault of the author. All in all, an excellent introduction, certainly accessable for the lay reader.

A History of Ancient Egypt, a translation from the original French, is an excellent and readable introduction to Egyptian History. It provides an overview of the major political and social events in Egypt beginning with a brief survey of prehistory and ending with the conquest by Alexander the Great. The book covers the old, middle, and new kingdoms as well as the intermediate periods and ends with two chapters on the Nubian/Saite and Persian/Greek periods. It also includes a chapter on the "invasion" of the Hyksos as well as chapter describing the religious changes made by Akhenaten.

The book's great strength is its readability and continuity. While other histories of Egypt often get bogged down in archeological details, Grimal's work connects the dots in a smooth and engaging narrative style. It may be that he occasionally glosses the fine points to provide continuity, but having read more detailed texts (Oxford History of Ancient Egypt), I believe his book provides a clearer picture for the beginner.

This is not to say that the book lacks accuracy but scholars of Egyptian history will no doubt have their difficulties with some of Grimal's details. The book was first published in 1988 and, as such, is slightly out of date. Grimal also tends to use Greek names for most pharaohs as well many place names ie. Cheops instead of Khufu for the builder of the great pyramid. This can be a little confusing to the inexperienced reader if they have previously encountered other variants.

While the book covers the major political events in ancient Egypt, the inclusion of chapters explaining the Egyptian system of religious beliefs, funerary practices and a long description of the temple complexes at Karnak provide much needed background. The plates (all black and white) in the book are adequate, although often the maps lack detail. For the interested reader I would recommend "Le Description de L'Egypte", put out by Benedikt Taschen Verlag. This book, a beautiful collection of paintings, architectural drawings and maps, produced by a team commissioned by Napoleon, fills in many of the visual details missing in Grimal's work.

I would strongly recommend "A History of Ancient Egypt" to the casual reader, interested in Egyptian history, who does not want to be swamped with details. For the more scholarly it includes a brief glossary, a chronology of dynasties, an extensive bibliography, annotated suggestions for further reading and a fairly detailed index. Because of this it might also be useful as an introductory text in Egyptology, but given its age and narrative style, it will likely not be the first choice of experienced Egyptologists.

Beyond the descriptions of the archaeological discoveries, what really jumped out at me reading The Ice Maiden were the expeditions themselves. Reinhard is clearly accustomed to working on a shoestring budget, which requires a team working well together and willing to deal with physical discomfort amidst uncertainties and delays. Some of the most enjoyable passages are of the easy camaraderie and mutual respect between Reinhard and his teams of Peruvians and Argentines that shines through during his descriptions of later expeditions, including a couple filled with tension. It reads like being on real expeditions, with people facing real problems in tough conditions.

The best line comes when Reinhard is hemming and hawing to his team members in Salta, Argentina, apologizing to everybody in advance, explaining all the potential problems to come during their prolonged stay at 22,000 feet while excavating the world's highest archaeological site. There's an awkward silence, then one member speaks up: "I just want to get out of the city and onto a mountain!" After having read this book, you'll know what he means, and also learn a lot about Andean beliefs, mountaineering, and the scientific importance of the team's spectacular discoveries.

Johan Reinhard led the archeological expeditions that discovered incredibly well-preserved Inca mummies in the Andes Mountains, including the world-famous Juanita in Peru and even more exciting finds in Argentina. This book offers details on several of Reinhard's expeditions, along with some new knowledge about Inca culture. We learn here that Inca nobles often traveled with great hardship to the summits of the most imposing mountains in the Andes, centuries before the advent of technical mountaineering. In fact, the mountains themselves were revered as deities, and human sacrifices were offered at their very summits, resulting in mummies that were remarkably preserved in the frigid environment. This book features outstanding photos of these mummies and the other valuable Inca artifacts that were found on the expeditions, while Reinhard reveals all the possibilities of the brand new science of high-altitude archeology, which have already contributed to expanding our knowledge of the Incas. The only problem with this book is that Reinhard spends far more time discussing the logistical and interpersonal issues behind his expeditions. This is still readable info for those interested in mountaineering, but Reinhard lapses into unnecessary details about personal disputes and bureaucratic red tape. This is all at the expense of more knowledge about the details of Inca culture that were unveiled, especially concerning their mountain climbing practices and their customs of human sacrifice in some of the most inhospitable locations on Earth. [~doomsdayer520~]

The world's oldest artifically preserved mummies (before 4000 B.C.) were found in coastal regions of southern Peru and northern Chile. "Mummies provide information which can be used to educate the world about the unique history of a remarkable ancient civilization. These frozen bodies allow a view into the past that cannot be obtained through any other means. Because of the Incas' practice of making human sacrifices at sites on high mountains, the Andes region is the only one in the world with a good chance of finding frozen mummies."

There was no form of writing in the Andes prior to the Spanish conquest of 1532. Although no Spaniard in Peru witnessed a human sacrifice, several 'chroniclers' reported details provided to them by the Incas. "The monumental complex of structures at Tiahuanaco, Boliivia, constitutes one of the most impressive archaeological sites in South America. Large monoliths were used in making religious structures nearly 1700 years ago. This urban-ceremonial complex was the center for a civilization that lasted more than 700 years -- longer than the Roman Empire."

The highest point of Ampato's summit had steep gullies leading down from it. The Ice Maiden (named Juanita) was swept down one of the gullies when a part of the summit ridge collapsed. The Ice Maiden's bundle was found lying in the open amidst ice pinnacles, after it had fallen down from the summit. She had been sacrificed to the gods on Ampato more than five hundred years ago. "Her frozen body evokes her humanity, while also being a time capsule, providing unprecedented information about one of the ancient world's most important civilizations."

In 1999, three frozen mummies were found at Llullaillaco, a young boy and two older females. Johan Reinhard's children's book, DISCOVERING THE INCA ICE MAIDEN (1995) was successful and chosen as 'Outstanding Book of the Year' by the Junior Literary Guild.

Recently scientists examined an Inca human sacrifice found on Mount Chuscha in northwestern Argentina. There was a PBS special on this and Reinhard's expeditions in the 90s called ICE MUMMIES. He was a research associate at the Field Museum of Natural History in Chicago before his 'finds' and is now 'explorer-in-residence of the National Geographic Society' who published this book.

Johann Reinhard's moment by moment account of discovering the Incan Ice Maiden covered all the subjects I wanted with the topic of this importance. He reports not only the expected archeology, historical/cultural context, and actual discoveries, but also the logistics, preservation science and the usual professional infighting that accompanies such media intense stories. Reinhard exposes much of his thoughts and feelings toward the growing number of players as everyone wants to be part of the story. Would-be explorers would do well to read and note the worries and difficulties modern discoveries take on.

Having a long-standing amateur's interest in both archaeology and high-altitude mountaineer (I am neither an archaeologist nor a mountaineer myself) I was predisposed to like this book. But the first two chapters really put me off. Having a really exciting story to tell, Reinhard spends far too much time telling us what a great explorer he is and what jerks the Peruvian archaeological establishment, and even his fellow climbers, are. Reinhard can be justifiably proud of his accomplishments, but his arrogance is annoying and distracting.

Much of the rest of the book seems to have been transcribed almost without editing from his personal diaries, interspersed with random factoids about Inca culture and mummy conservation techniques. What should have been a riveting account was choppy and hard to read.

I agree with the other reviewers that the photos were great, though!

Kelso has done a great service in unearthing the early stages of Virginia history at Jamestown. This work is very useful in getting down in the dirt and understanding what really happened at Jamestown. Unfortunately, archeology provides clues but cannot claim 100% accuracy in its assessment of events. This work is designed more for the scholar than for the laymen yet is written well enough if you want more details about the events that transpired in our early history. Recommended for scholars on early colonial history in America as a resource.

For many years, archeologists believed that Jamestown, the site of the first permanent English settlement in the New World, had been washed away by the James River. In the 1990s, William Kelso and his team got permission to dig, and almost immediately began to uncover the remains of the old fort. This book, illustrated with dozens of color pictures, is Kelso's account of what they found and what it means to our understanding of who the people of Jamestown were and how they lived.

Kelso includes interesting science but still manages to write at the layman's level. This is a very neat book for those interested in the topic, and will be especially enjoyed after a visit to the Jamestowne historic site.

Reviewer: Elizabeth Clare, co-author of the historical novel "To the Ends of the Earth: The Last Journey of Lewis and Clark"

This is a good book. However, I felt a little disappointed at the end. The ending did not provide the details I was searching for.

Lots of details about Jamestown I never knew. The book really gives you a feel of what these people had to go through.

fascinating especially if you love archaeological puzzles. To find the wealth of information on what was thought to be lost reveals a great and colorful adventure. However, with the profusion of compass designations used in the descriptions, I caught myselft looking for a comprehensive site map with those features identified along with compass orientation. Photos or diagrams of various aspects of the dig give only piecemeal disjointed views. Often captions use directions ("junction of east palsiade wall trench with the north bulwark) but does not orient the photograph or identify those features in the photo. A drawing of the fort superimposed on a photograph is too small, does not indicate a compass orientation, and does not identify the features shown just as one example. A nice double page fold out site map would have added a lot.

The encyclical accounting of the Persian Empire. Olmstead was the first author to give an account of the Persians from their perspective. He begins well before Cyrus the Great and runs through the entire Achaemenid period recounting the conquest and administration of the empire until its demise by Alexander's onslaught. Olmstead goes into exceptional detail in giving accounts of the inscriptions and palace mural carvings at the ruins of Persepolis and other locales. His account of Zoroaster is also noteworthy from a liturgical perspective, though the dating of Zoroaster's life has changed since Olmstead passed away in 1945. Overall, a fantastic exposure to the Persian Empire. Best read in conjunction with one or two later works to optimally digest newer discoveries and conclusions.

This is a good book on this subject. But, I'd like to suggest a very good source of Persian (Farsi) books on the net: www.iranibook.com & www.iranibookshop.com You will find any Farsi books in this feild

Most have heard and studied the Greek and the Romans, but before Europe ruled the wrold, there were the Persians. The Medes and Persians survived the Empires of the Assyrians and the Babylonians, before granted their time in history. One of the most structured and orgainized empires of the ancient world, it had an impact on world history, Juduaism, and later Christdom. Alexander the Greek went to Hellenize the world and ended up being influenced by the Persian culture he conquered. Tremendous book of an interesting time of history.

This book is utterly remarkable. Well written and incredibly comprehensive iteration of the scope, flow and detail of the empire that was Persia, from early pre-Empire times to the Alexandrian conquest (and a bit beyond). It discusses legal, social, military, architectural, religious and business practices, inter-familial rivalries, conquests,etc., in remarkable detail, and it even puts Biblical history of the Jews in exile in context. It captures aspects of the ruling style and methods of the Mede and Persian rulers. It is simply a great and literally huge book, by a Professor whose depth of knowledge and love of his subject is inspiring, even several decades after his death.

This book was written from Iranian perspective and not from Greek prespective. As a result, all Iranian should buy this particular book, and self educate themselves with regard to their history.

This is not what I was looking for, but it does make a nice addition to my coffee table in the form of art.

I've checked this book out of my local library three times. We've been working with an architect to design a French country house, very simple. No amount of pictures has conveyed the message of simplicity to our architect. He kept giving us elaborate Palladian designs, and I kept saying, "French Mas". not "French Chateau" and certainly not some Monster House version of an Italian Villa. We've decided to end this expensive misunderstanding and begin again with another designer, this time showing the simple pictures in "Mediterranean Style" to convey the simple rusticity that we desire.

This is a wonderful book, filled with pages of beautiful pictures and creative ideas. It is a book that will inspire you to redecorate your home a "La Mediterranea" or maybe even send you off on a trip to visit such magnificent places. I highly recommend anyone interested in Mediterranean design/decor to get this book, as it not only gives you ideas, but also some easy-to-follow steps on achieving certain effects as pictured. Thumbs up for this one.

Due to unforeseen circumstances whereby my lower living area was suddenly subjected unceremoniously to several feet of murky moisture, I found myself in need of a partial home makeover, but with a shoestring budget and a short time frame.

Fortuitously, this book came through it unscathed, and I took it as an omen that Mediterranean was the way it should be.

The pictures are strikingly beautiful, the colors breath-taking, and my family may not be over-excited to hear that the foyer will now be a washed purple color with an earthen colored roof, accented by a canary yellow metal staircase. The book banishes all fear of the lavish use of color, clearly illustrating how color can enhance your surroundings, making a