Adams' and Cialowicz' book is most enlightening for a non-Egyptologist such as myself. I was surprised by the length, only 72 pages including an index and bibliography, but well illustrated with photos and diagrams the details of which make one want to search further. I would like, however, to make a small case for historians of art who on one page are dismissed, although I would agree generally not without good reason. But a few things stood out for me as an art historian: (1) the figures 18j & 18k hardly seem like bull's heads as described but rather elephants with emphatic trunks and slightly less obvious tusks, certainly not horns. If the latest information points too a South to North (Upper to Lower) Egyptian unification under Narmer, the early appearance of a Southern kingdom or proto-state at Elephantine and Abydos would suggest the African connections and probable origins of the ancient Egyptian culture. Such a suggestion also weaves this book's theme with the recent publications by Brophy, The Origin Map; Bauval & Brophy, Black Genesis; and Schoch, Forgotten Civilization dovetailing with the South to North cultural and political influence. Item (2) the "pottery jug" Fig. 34 is probably a water jug meant to be hung by a thin rope at the sides enabling the pot to float in the hot desert air, sweat, and cool its contents(water, beer?) as also found in the Minoan Octopus vase and others; Item (3) those vases absent a flat "foot" to stand on as in Fig. 14 were probably buried partly in the floor of temples, palaces, and houses, and similarly found all over the ancient Mediterannean (espec. Minoan). Even the discoloration of the vases of Fig. 14 would suggest that, as a means of keeping a liquid cool in a desert environment. There must be some archeological evidence for the latter; (4) finally, once there is a "state," or "principality," or territory with a center, it has a locus, a place. As an art historian I would be inclined to date monuments that show ground lines beneath figures as one chronological step in advance over those without groundlines which otherwise would be dated earlier. My only serious criticism is that not enough specific dates are given even though they are in some cases now known thanks to new dating technologies mentioned. The reader must instead depend on the authors' authority. Otherwise, I found it a fascinating read.