Mysterious Ancient America: An Investigation into the Enigmas of America's Pre-History [Paperback]

Paul Devereux (Author)

Book Description

Publication Date: August 28, 2002

Delve into the forgotten dimension of ancient Native American life, culture, and spirituality. Filled with unique and previously unpublished research and based on the findings of many scholars, scientists, and explorers, this fascinating survey offers a well-rounded portrait of an enigmatic world. Consider evidence about the origins of the Native American people, including the earliest accepted and disputed signs of their presence. Examine the myth-worlds and religions of the Native Americans, including Shamanism and the widespread use of mind-altering plants. Find out what is known about such lost civilizations as the Olmec, Maya, Inca, and Anasazi. Look at the role astronomy, rock art, and sacred landscapes played in these civilizations, and investigate one of the greatest puzzles in ancient America-the existence of curious ground markings, including the famous Nazca lines. Finally, identify some of the vestigial survivals of ancient traditions and practices in modern Native American culture.

Product Details

• Paperback: 192 pages
• Publisher: Vega (August 28, 2002)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 1843335948
• ISBN-13: 978-1843335948
• Product Dimensions: 8.6 x 5.6 x 0.6 inches
• Shipping Weight: 9.3 ounces
• Average Customer Review: 4.0 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (2 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #1,511,739 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

4 of 4 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Masterful Unearthing of the New World, March 12, 2003

By A Customer

This review is from: Mysterious Ancient America: An Investigation into the Enigmas of America's Pre-History (Paperback)

"Rediscover a continent's lost pre-history here. The United States is today a global icon for all that is new and forward looking - and this is regrettable, as Devereux points out, that so many of its modern inhabitants and some of its scholars are ignorant of the awesome sweep of its ancient past, or deny it. I can heartily recommend Mysterious Ancient America as a perfect remedy for that omission. The FT verdict: 9 out of 10". So said Bob Rickard, Editor `Fortean Times' in March 2003 edition

"To understand archaic Aztec cosmology, a European thinker has to cross what is probably the widest intellectual gap conceivable between one human mind and another. Holy smoking mirrors! Paul Devereux, only you can help us now. We need to listen to the tribal world voice and this [Mysterious Ancient America] is a book which will tell us how." From Jeremy Harte in `Third Stone' No. 45, 2003

5 of 12 people found the following review helpful:

3.0 out of 5 stars quite scholarly and interesting but weak on language matters, April 26, 2003

By 

Mark Newbrook (Heswall, Wirral, United Kingdom) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: Mysterious Ancient America: An Investigation into the Enigmas of America's Pre-History (Paperback)

Devereux's book is quite scholarly and is informed by many of the most recent developments in the various relevant disciplines. He refers to some of the cases which genuinely suggest more complex patterns of early diffusion than have traditionally been accepted (eg, Kennewick Man).

However, the treatment of linguistic issues (on which I am best equipped to comment) is relatively poor. This is partly because, although Devereux begins with a brief survey of pre-scientific and `deep fringe' claims about the settlement of the Americas, he has relatively little to say about recent `shallow fringe' and near-fringe diffusionists - many of whom have made heavy use of epigraphic and philological material - or their opponents. The names of key diffusionists such as Fell, Kelley and McGlone do not appear in his index. Neither do those of their skeptical critics such as Feder. In Chapters 6 and 9 and in short passages elsewhere he does raise some of the relevant cases, but the reader does not obtain a very satisfactory view of how these cases have been played out. There are in fact too many inadequately referenced statements. And indeed a careful survey would certainly lead to the conclusion that all linguistically based claims about migrations in the more recent but pre-Viking past are on very dubious footings. Diffusionists should seek better evidence elsewhere (but see below).

This is not to say that Devereux's treatment is not useful. For instance, in Chapter 6, Devereux discusses alleged Ogham inscriptions and the Bat Creek Stone; while not mentioning Fell, Gordon, McGlone et al. or their prominent critics, he does refer to the open-minded skepticism of Reynolds and Ross on the former case and to Kirk's relatively little-known skeptical work on the other. But there are large gaps here, considering the heavy use made of linguistic arguments by many diffusionists.

In addition, Devereux accepts (as at least plausible; sometimes as established) some diffusionist positions on language matters which are supported only by tiny minorities of qualified linguists (if any) or by amateur enthusiasts with no knowledge of current linguistic thought. For instance, very few linguists have been persuaded by Xu's claims of links between the Olmec and the Shang Chinese scripts. Positive references to these claims are found mainly in the work of Afrocentrists (not even all of these), creationists, rank amateurs like Matlock, etc. Xu does not appear to be very familiar with epigraphic or historical linguistic methodology, and Devereux is too easily impressed. Three key points here are: a) The meanings of Olmec symbols are not known, as Olmec has not been persuasively deciphered; thus one cannot be sure that any pairs of Olmec and non-Olmec symbols have the same meanings. b) Many of the symbols used by Xu are pictographic and as such liable to be independently invented. c) The odds in favour of short words and simple symbols - even non-pictographic ones - being independently invented are demonstrably MUCH better than Xu and Devereux seem to believe. Actually, most non-linguists who write about such matters make this last crucial error. (Many anthropologists would argue that similar errors vitiate many diffusionist arguments based on non-linguistic data such as legends or artefacts - some of which Devereux also rehearses.)

Of course, some of the diffusionist proposals discussed are not (or no longer) to be seen as dramatic. It was mainstream scientists, not fringe diffusionists, who identified Kennewick Man as probably non-Amerindian and thus anomalous. And on a broader front it is now quite usual to find the view that humans were in the Americas some time before 12,000 BP expressed by mainstream scholars. Crawford's use of linguistic data (at a rather general level) to support the genetic and other non-linguistic data that point in this direction will not be seen as threatening. On the other hand, more specific claims about more recent links between specific Asian and American language families (as rehearsed by Wells in his recent book) are typical of the fringe and of mavericks such as Ruhlen (see also above).

I realise that Devereux has a specific interest in shamanism, and his discussion of this topic is very interesting (although some of his views are highly controversial). But I am not sure that the facts of such cases point in a strongly diffusionist direction.