In this post I attempt to summarize Graham Hancock’s book Fingerprints of the Gods: The Evidence of Earth’s Lost Civilization (1995). This book influenced the background for my novels. It also, in my mind, dovetails with Douglas Van Dorn’s biblical/archaeological research on giants in ways that I am sure Hancock never intended or imagined.
This post is only a summary. It will naturally be much less convincing than the book itself. My copy of Fingerprints runs 578 pages counting the bibliography and index. Hancock builds up to his thesis slowly, presenting many different lines of evidence and dropping mysterious hints to keep the reader intrigued. He also has to get into some fairly technical topics, particularly when talking about astronomy. I can’t do any of that in a 1,000-word post. So, like a bucket of cold water in the face, you will be treated to Hancock’s thesis in all its bizarre and fascinating glory.
Incredibly Sophisticated, Incredibly Ancient Maps
Hancock’s first two chapters are dedicated to the details of a number of old maps drawn up during the 1500s which show parts of South America that were undiscovered by Europeans at that time. More intriguingly, they show the coast of Antarctica as it appears under the ice. (This was before modern man’s discovery of Antarctica, and before seismic surveys revealed what lay beneath the ice.) The best-known of these is the Piri Reis map (drawn up in A.D. 1513), but there are others, such as the Orontes Finaeus map, the Mercator map, and the Buache map. All these mapmakers drew on older maps, which they compiled. Piri Reis, for example, had access to the Imperial Library at Constantinople, which is probably where he got the sources for his map.
The other amazing thing about these old maps is they often show locations in South America, for example, at accurate longitude and latitude.
The lesson that Hancock draws from these maps is this. Whatever source maps Piri Reis and others used, must themselves have been drawn up by an advanced seafaring civilization that had explored the world and knew how to project longitude and latitude. Amazingly, these seafarer/mathematicians apparently charted Antarctica at a time when it was not yet completely covered in ice. That makes their civilization, how do you say? Very, very old.
Ancient Astronomer/Engineers Again
And then there is ancient Egypt. Seventeen chapters are dedicated to it. There are many things to notice. Here are just a few: ancient Egyptian civilization seems to have appeared suddenly as a high civilization, complete with myths, history, engineering, and an obsession with boats. Overall, its history is one of slow decline and loss of knowledge, rather than slow buildup. (Interestingly, the same point has been made about ancient Sumer.)
Hancock writes, “Robert Bauval’s evidence showed that the three pyramids [at Giza] were an unbelievably precise terrestrial map of the three stars of Orion’s belt, accurately reflecting the angles between each of them and even (by their respective sizes) providing some indication of their individual magnitudes. Moreover, this map extended outwards to the north and south to encompass several other structures on the Giza plateau … the Giza monuments were so arranged as to provide a picture of the skies … as they had looked – and only as they had looked – around the year 10,450 BC.” (page 356)
The Great Pyramid at Giza has a ratio of 2pi between its original height and the circumference of its base. This strengthens the argument that it was meant to represent a star (a circle). The Pyramid of the Sun at Teotihuacan has a ratio of 4pi between height and base circumference. Both of these pyramids had to have an odd angle of slope to accomplish this (52 degrees for Giza; 43.5 degrees for Teotihuacan), so it seems to have been intentional. Pi was supposedly not calculated correctly until it was done by Archimedes in the third century BC, but apparently the ancient Egyptians and the ancient Mexicans were familiar with it.
Where Hancock is going with all this is that people on both sides of the Atlantic got their amazing engineering, mathematical, and astronomical knowledge from an older “source” civilization. He thinks it was the same seafaring civilization that apparently charted Antarctica. This impression is strengthened by the Egyptian obsession with boats and by the Incan legends that say all this knowledge came from over the sea.
Is Hancock Arguing for Aliens?
Not in this book.
He has written several books about ancient mysteries. I have not read them all. He has now started writing fiction, and in the one novel of his that I have read, it becomes apparent that his interest in all this is decidedly New Age in character. The novel features an angelic/earth mother spirit guide, telepathic Neanderthals, the whole nine yards. So, I can’t swear that aliens won’t show up at some point. But that is not the thesis of Fingerprints. Hancock is arguing that there was a very advanced civilization of people well before 10,000 BC. Whether these people were taught by aliens, spirits, or some other stuff like that, he does not say, thankfully. Because, luckily, this book relies heavily on evidence.
So the ancient cartographers were not aliens, not even according to Hancock. But still we have a problem: Where was this civilization located? You don’t normally get an advanced civilization until you have a critical mass of arable land. In short, a continent. Hancock believes he has solved this problem. He believes there was such a mass of land, but that it has since undergone a cataclysm. And now we come to the really wild part of his thesis.
It’s the End of the World As They Knew It
Mythology about a period of cataclysms in ancient times is universal. Hancock dedicates four chapters to this alone. Flood myths, for example, are very common. But most cultures also record things like earthquakes, fire falling from the sky, the sun not rising for some long period of time, or an endless winter. Hancock discusses myths like this in some detail from the following cultures: Aztec, Sumerian, Greek, Inuit, Chinese, Southeast Asian, Pacific, Indian, Egyptian, Mayan, and Norse. It should not be hard for the reader to track down these myths. Some cultures (the Aztecs and the Hopi, for example) believe that disasters come at regular intervals and that each one ushers in a new age of the world.
Hancock believes that these myths are actually historical records (with all the usual caveats about them becoming garbled, etc.) of a period of geologic upheaval that happened within human history. I’ll put it in his own words:
“This geological theory was formulated by Professor Charles Hapgood and supported by Albert Einstein. What it suggests is a complete slippage of our planet’s thirty-mile-thick lithosphere over its nearly 8000-mile-thick central core, forcing large parts of the western hemisphere southward towards the equator and thence to the Antarctic Circle. This movement is not seen as taking place along a due north-south meridian but on a swivelling course – pivoting, as it were, around the central plains of what is now the United States. The result is that the north-eastern segment of North America (in which the North Pole was formerly located in Hudson’s Bay) was dragged southwards out of the Arctic Circle along with large parts of Siberia [which were dragged into the Arctic Circle].
“In the southern hemisphere, Hapgood’s model shows the landmass that we now call Antarctica, much of which was previously at temperate or even warm latitudes, being shifted in its entirety inside the Antarctic Circle. The overall movement is seen as having been in the region of 30 degrees (approximately 2000 miles) and as having been concentrated, in the main, between the years 14,500 BC and 12,500 BC – but with massive aftershocks on a planetary scale continuing at widely-separated intervals down to about 9500 BC.” (page 471)
So that’s the thesis. Here are the things it explains:
- Why North America was once covered with glaciers, centered around Hudson Bay, and why they suddenly started melting.
- Why, during the same period of time, Siberia was apparently not covered in glaciers
- Why there is evidence that the climate was once much warmer in parts of Siberia. We find flash-frozen mammoths with temperate or even tropical plants still in their mouths and stomachs. (Actually, I still don’t understand how mammoths could be flash-frozen even with Hancock’s thesis. But at least it offers some explanation.)
- Why there is evidence that the climate was once much warmer in Antarctica as well.
- According to Hancock’s theory, the survivors of this advanced civilization that previously existed on what is now Antarctica fled their homeland, taking their science with them.
- They settled in other parts of the world and tried to rebuild.
- Hancock also thinks that they deliberately seeded myths and cults to preserve knowledge and to draw people’s attention to the processional cycle of the constellations because they wanted to warn them. They believed that geological disasters like this occurred cyclically in concert with celestial events. He believes this is why the pyramids were built, for example. A good chunk of his book is about this, but I don’t have time to relate it here.
What’s a Christian Writer to Do With All This?
First of all, it is not possible to integrate everything. It just isn’t.
To take just one example from above, if the earth’s crust took 2,000 years to slip, how did mammoths come to be flash frozen? I have no idea. I don’t think anybody does, whatever their theory.
To take another example, Hancock’s thesis requires that after the age of cataclysms, there were human survivors in scattered parts of the world. These were then visited by refugees from the mother civilization, who taught them things, and they remember these culture-bringers in their mythology. You cannot make this work perfectly with the idea that at one point there was a universal flood that wiped out all humankind except four couples, and that the flood myths are memories of that.
Every culture has stories of culture-bringers (human or divine) who taught them to do things that are basic to that culture. Most cultures with a flood myth have the survivors of the flood landing right in that culture’s homeland and becoming the direct ancestors of that culture. Most of them don’t have a section in there where the survivors land somewhere very far away, and then their descendants travel a really long way to get to the current homeland. Most peoples believe that they live at the mythic center of the world. So you have to take these things into account. Every origin myth cannot be true in all its details.
That said, here is what I, as a Christian, have attempted to do with Hancock’s thesis and more importantly with the evidence that inspired it.
What I appreciate about Hancock is his attempt to take seriously the many lines of evidence that human beings were familiar with advanced mathematics, engineering, and astronomy long ages before we are told that human civilization started. This fits in, far better than the received “cave man” picture, with the ancient world as it is hinted at in the early chapters of Genesis. There we see civilization taking off like rocket, apparently with writing and record-keeping, and flourishing until it is destroyed by the flood.
Hancock’s theory of earth crust slippage does not contradict the Genesis account either. It is not hard to imagine an age of cataclysms leading up to the great flood. We are not told that this happened, but then Genesis, with its laser focus on redemptive history, does not tell us a great many of the things we would like to know. If we imagine earth crust slippage culminating in a worldwide flood, we end up with almost the same picture as that painted in Fingerprints. The only difference is that the amazing monuments at Giza and other places could not have been built by refugees from a mother civilization. They would have to have been built by Noah’s descendants trying to recover lost knowledge … or by the almost-unknown-to-us civilizations before the flood.
Genesis: Even More Daring than Hancock
Genesis does not give us a complete picture of the antediluvian world. It tells us only a few major names and events with very little explanation or context. We are not told how long the antediluvian period lasted; what the world population was before the flood; what the people or animals looked like or their relative sizes; what kind of technology existed; whether there were cities. As a result, we tend to picture Noah and his family, almost all alone, out in the middle of a desert (inspired by the way the Middle East appears today), with a bunch of modern-day animals. But we aren’t told that’s how it was. We aren’t told much at all. In fact, we don’t have – anywhere – any reliable sources that can tell us much about the very ancient world.
Genesis does, however, tell us one very weird thing which fits in well with worldwide myths but which Hancock’s thesis basically ignores.
Interesting as I find Fingerprints of the Gods, it is of course not perfect. Among other problems, it fails to take seriously the universal testimony of human culture that there used to be “gods.” Hancock falls prey (at least in this book) to the materialist notion that anything attributed to gods must be explainable by smarter people with higher technology. Of course, this smuggles in the idea that most ancient humans were stupid and gullible and would apply the “gods” label to anything they didn’t understand. This kind of snobbery dogs Hancock. For example, he quotes with approval a source that wonders how the Mayans could have had such advanced calendars when they hadn’t even invented the wheel.
Genesis, on the other hand, does not patronize ancient humans. Shockingly, it vindicates their myths. It is recorded in Genesis chapter 6 that the “sons of God” (some kind of heavenly beings, members of the divine council) came down to earth and intermarried with human women, and that their offspring were giants.
Obviously, that is a stunning claim. I can’t blame you if you’re not convinced of it on first hearing. Some day I will deal with it in more detail in another post (one that summarizes Douglas Van Dorn’s book). For now, I just want to say a few things about this idea as it relates to Hancock’s thesis.
Every culture, worldwide, has myths about gods and giants. There is a huge body of mythology about this stuff, and it usually shows up in the form of origin stories and tales that purport to be about historical rulers. No doubt the ideas of gods and giants, and many other themes from mythology, are a deep part of the human mental furniture. But this does not necessarily mean they are not also memories of historical events. How and why did this particular furniture get in our particular living room? Perhaps people did not get these ideas just from plumbing the depths of the human psyche. We might want to take these stories seriously as memories of historical events, since we are taking seriously the stories of floods and cataclysms that show up in the same cultures, and often in the very same narratives.
And, if you are still with me, taking seriously the idea of gods and giants might also give us our answer as to how people managed to build incredibly sophisticated monuments out of megaliths. Imagine a world in which people typically live almost a thousand years (per the ages given in Genesis) … in which ten or twelve generations can be alive at the same time, so knowledge is not lost … in which people are smarter and healthier than we are now, since there has been less genetic decay … and in which some of these people are actual giants. All of a sudden it starts to sound … maybe … almost possible. Maybe you and I could build the Giza pyramids too, if we had a thousand years to do it in and if we had intelligent giants helping (even directing?) us.
Now it’s your turn. I am posting this 24 hours late (I usually post on Friday, not Saturday), and even with the extra time, I realize this post is loosely written. This is such a big topic, worthy of an essay weeks or months in the making … not to say years. I did not spend years, months or even weeks on this post (although I have spent a few years thinking about all this stuff). My goal is not to make a watertight argument, just to sketch out some intriguing possibilities. Still, if you find problems with the post, point them out in the comments section (alongside your laudatory comments, of course) and I’ll do my best to tighten and polish it.
20 thoughts on “Graham Hancock’s Big Idea”
LikeLiked by 1 person
That would be so exciting. I love the idea of lost civilizations.
However, as I explored these theories a bit, it looks like both the ancient cartographers of Antarctica theory and the crust displacement/pole shift theory are pretty clearly erroneous.
Not as much fun, I know, but we’ve still got the Nephilim…
Please post some links or book names so I can find out more about whether they are erroneous. Not sources proving that someone disagrees with them (because I already know that almost everyone does), but sources that answer Hancock’s arguments or disprove key parts of his evidence.
My worldview won’t be destroyed if his theory is wrong. (I got along fine before I read his book.) But … if it is wrong, then there is still the huge question about the North American glaciers and the lack of same in Siberia. *Something* odd happened, clearly.
Anyway, it appears we may find out soon. We are being given dire warnings that the Antarctic ice has a huge cavity in it. They’ve already found fossil animals there, but if the ice (all?) melts away, the upside would be that we could verify whether, underneath it, there were the ruins of a human civilization. That’s if it doesn’t first cause a global disaster, of course.
Well, apparently the ice cap in Antarctica accumulates in visible layers each year, like growth rings, and we can count hundreds of thousands of them. The crust displacement theory would completely contradict what we seem to understand about the nature of the earth crust, is not based on any physical evidence, and offers no explanation as to what could have caused it. I was going to ask my geologist friend (who has also been on research trips to Antarctica several times) if he’d heard of this theory, but after having read up on it a bit, it seems pretty clear that it’s pretty baseless, and Hapgood wasn’t even a geologist or trained in any related field.
It looks like Hancock himself has given up on the Antarctica theory and in the second edition posits instead that the lost civilization was a globally-dispersed coastal civilization that was wiped out by rising sea levels.
The maps still remain, but it looks like the claim that they depict Antarctica (whether covered in ice or not) is pretty dubious, and requires an awful lot of redrawing and ignoring the notes on the maps themselves. Here is an examination of the Piri Re’is map. The same website has pages devoted to the Orontius Fineaus map and the Philippe Buache map, and some other Hancock topics as well (under the heading Lost Civilisations).
I’m tempted to start posting quotations from the link, but I know you’ll want to read the whole thing yourself anyway.
Yes, thanks. I will follow up.
I’m sure your geologist friend would not subscribe to the slippage theory. A basic assumption in geology is the principle that our earth was shaped by gradual processes still visible today, never by cataclysmic processes. So naturally the idea of earth crust slippage would be heretical to received geology. (I’m married to a geologist. If he read this post, I’m sure he’d be tearing out his hair if he had hair.)
Hancock does offer an explanation of what could have physically caused the slippage. I didn’t get into it in the post, because it’s really complex. (Something about the usual slight wobble in the earth’s rotation exacerbated by other stuff happening in the solar system plus pressure from the ice up North, if I remember rightly. That’s what supposedly ties the cataclysm to celestial events and makes the Zodiac so important for predicting future disasters.) Of course, if you want to integrate it with the worldwide flood, the ultimate cause would have been a series of warning/judgments leading up to a big judgment.
That’s so funny that Hancock has backed off the earth crust slippage thesis. I did not know that. I did know that he had come out with a book about ancient ruins all over the world that are now underwater. It was interesting and I read parts of it, but like Fingerprints it was really long and involved, so I did not read the whole thing. I didn’t have the time just then, and to be honest I figured he was just expanding on his thesis.
I’ll read up on the ice layers, but I reserve a little bit of skepticism about them for the following reason. There are several processes that supposedly show great age … coral reef buildup, ash layers, fossilization, molecular decay. Every once in a while, we find an example of a process happening that lays these things down much more quickly than is supposedly possible, giving a false positive of great age. Also, there are major problems with integrating all these different methods of dating.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Pingback: Ancient Maps of Antarctica Debunked. Maybe. Also, We Are All Idiots – Out of Babel
Pingback: Flat Earth Anyone? – Out of Babel
Pingback: Setting: Beringia – Out of Babel
Pingback: Stone Age Surgery – Out of Babel
Pingback: Haven't Posted about Antarctica in a While – Out of Babel
Pingback: A Disaster Movie that Has Everything – Out of Babel
Pingback: Gobekli Tepe, the World’s Oldest Temple? – Out of Babel
Pingback: Ancient People Were Really Smart, Part … What? 10? – Out of Babel
Pingback: Anecdotal Evidence for a Worldwide Flood – Out of Babel
Pingback: Ancient People Knew About Mathematics – Out of Babel
I always found the notion that “higher beings” cannot coexist in the same timeline as Gods and humans of exaggerated intellect to be frustrating. With that said, you make a much better case for reading him than most of my friends have. It sounds like a much more grounded version of Hermann Wieland or Waddell. And that’s probably saying something.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well, I’m glad I got you interested.
That said, my summary only represents his ideas as of this book. Apparently, he keeps changing his theories.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’d be a hypocrite if I blamed him. My own idears “evolve.” 😉
LikeLiked by 1 person
Pingback: Book Review: The Origins of the Mithraic Mysteries by David Ulansey – Out of Babel
Pingback: The Human Impulse to Make Stone Spheres for Some Reason – Out of Babel