A bit disappointed, 13 Mar 2003

The book is not terribly well written, and his treatment of the matters at hand is superficial and based on just a few sources, all of which supports his views. Most of the supposed mysteries in the book are much better dealt with by authors such as Robert Bauval and especially Graham Hancock, both of whom are also cited in "Ancient Traces".

This book is only recommendable to those who has never read any other books about Atlantean theories, the age of the pyramids, erosion of the Sphinx, and so on. Whereas it is not very interesting to the "experienced" mystery-"lover", it does after all introduce the reader to a host of mysteries, and may spark an interest in the subjects.

 Comment | Permalink | Was this review helpful to you? (Report this)

Thought provoking, 15 Jun 2001

I found it to be one of the most enjoyable books I've read being both interested in archaeology, prehistory and spiratuality. One thing for certain; while it critises archaeological and anthropologist institutes for dismissing evidence of ancient sites and artefacts which suggest that man is much older than conventional view allows, it does not dismiss any evidence excavated from sites accepted by 'conventional' experts either which some books of this type unfortunately does. In other words, it is not too one sided but I am rather skeptic over the 'evidence' that humans may have lived at the time of the dinosaurs. Perhaps those footprints were exterrestrial?!! It certainly wouldn't be an easy life to co-exist with the likes of T-Rex and raptors for any of those who saw the film Jurassic Park.

I would recommend it but only to broad and open minded people.

 Comment | Permalink | Was this review helpful to you? (Report this)