As most of the readers of the BIS are discerning people, you will probably subscribe to 'The Skeptical Inquirer' and will have seen the review of this book in the most recent (spring 1988) edition. Why another review? you may be asking. Well, this review was written before I saw Charles J. Cazeau's one in SI, and it puts forward an entirely different opinion. In fact I was astonished at Caseau's review and his conclusion. We may have been writing about different books; or perhaps I am too pedantic or unrealistic about the quality I expect from a leading international publisher like Time/Life.
The massive advertising campaign by Time/Life Books for 'Mysteries of the Unknown' can hardly have escaped your attention. Inserts have been dropping out of all sorts of magazines, including 'New Scientist'.
Reading the advertising blurb it was impossible to know whether the books were going to be good or not. Credulous statements might just be a tease I thought. Get people interested, then hit them with the facts perhaps! After all, they do claim that 'Every volume has been meticulously researched to bring you the full acts about each bizarre case. ...delight in a narrative that reveals all sides to a story, treats each subject impartially - and leaves you to meake up your own mind about the world's greatest mysteries.' With promises like that you can't go far wrong, can you?
So I sent off my order for one of the first books. I could chose from Mystic Places or 'The UFO Phenomenon' each of which had its own advertising campaign. I chose the former because I thought it had less scope for sensationalism. Surely Time/Life wouldn't be irresponsible in their portrayal of the Bermuda Triangle.
One of the advertising leaflets had included a photograph of the book opened at pages covering Flight 19's disappearance in the Bermuda Triangle. It told the usual Berlitz-type story, ending in the sensational '...students of the occult blame the disaster on the malevolent powers said to flourish in the Bermuda Triangle'. Not a good sign, I known, but perhaps the following pages would take a different line...
The main chapters of the book are: Atlantis: The Eternal Quest; Secrets of the Great Pyramid; The Meaning of the Megaliths; Pictures on the Earth; and An Interior World. In the book, the Triangle is covered by three short items. The first tells the story of the 'Mary Celeste' (at least they got the name right!), with just a hint that the Triangle may have been responsible: '....the 'Mary Celeste' is believed by many to have been doomed by the inexplicable evil that lurks in the Bermuda Triangle'. The pre-publicity incorrectly stated that the ''Mary Celeste'.... sailed through the heart of the Bermuda Triangle'. Having sailed from New York and been found drifting between the Azores and Portugal the ship is hardly likely to have been anywhere near the Triangle.
Flight 19 is 'explained' in only five paragraphs. In the Time/Life version, one of the last messages received from the flight is changed from "I suggest we fly due east until we run out of gas...." to "We'll fly west until we hit the beach or run out of gas". Of the Mariner flying boat which was sent in search of Flight 19, but which 'was seen to explode in mid-air', the Time/Life version states: '....before long a Mariner flying boat was in the air. But the Mariner was not heard of again'.
The final mystery of the Triangle is one which I have read before but which I have not seen explained. It describes the experiences of a Beechcraft Bonanza pilot who claims to have been the victim of a time warp having made a flight from the Bahamas to Florida in forty-five minutes instead of the normal seventy-five. During the flight he experienced problems with his compass, navigation equipment, and radio. Furthermore he claims to have flown through a mysterious cloud, flying out of it into a greenish white haze, not the blue sky he had seen ahead. There's one for Larry Kusche.
This book certainly proves one thing. That Time/Life's hype for this series was totally dishonest.
'Mystic Places' does nothing to throw light on the infamous but non-existing Curse of Tutankhamen. Indeed they make mistake after mistake in their publicity and the four paragraphs in the book devoted to Tut. To understand these mistakes a few technicalities must be explained. The tomb is the complete area of Tutankhamen's burial place and comprises a corridor, antechamber, annex, burial chamber, and treasury. Within the burial chamber the stone sarcophagus containing Tut's body was surrounded by four shrines of guilded wood, one inside the other, the outer one almost entirely filling the burial chamber.
A photograph in Time/Life's publicity has the following caption: 'A remarkable photograph that captures the precise moment in November 1922, when Howard Carter and Lord Carnarvon entered the tomb of Tutankhamen '(Error 1) '. Within two months Carnarvon was dead. '(Error 2)' Was he the first victim of the pharaoh's curse?'
Error 1: According to 'Tutankhamen' by Christian Desroches-Noblecourt (Penguin 1965) the photograph shows the excavators opening the doors of the second gilt shrine in the burial chamber. The names of those in the photograph are not mentioned in the book, but as the burial chamber was opened on the 17th February 1923 and the first coffin not until 10th October 1925 it is certain that the photograph must have been taken some time after February 1923. Indeed it is more than likely that Carnarvon is not even in the photograph; that it was taken after he died. I haven't pursued the matter further - but Time/Life's 'meticulous research' should have done.
Error 2: Only if the photograph was taken on or soon after 17th February 1923 could Carnarvon have died within two months. As this schedule doesn't seem to fit, Time/Life are very likely wrong. Meticulous research of this quality doesn't merit consolation points. Anyway, by using the 17th February date I am just looking for facts to fit the theory. If they had written that Carnarvon died within four months I suppose I could find a suitable date to fit. That's pseudoscience!
The photograph appears in 'Mystic Places' but with a different caption: 'As his assistants look on, archaeologist Howard Carter carefully opens a set of nested doors leading to the long-hidden sarcophagus of Tutankhamen'. Carnarvon isn't given a mention. Could it be that Time/Life have discovered what I believe; that he wasn't there?
The text tells us '...the expeditioners spent the next year excavating before opening the chamber containing Tut's sarcophagus. '(Error 3)' But Lord Carnarvon did not live to see it. He had died of blood poisoning months earlier '(Errors 4 & 5)' - the victim, some said, of a pharaoh's curse.'
Error 3: As mentioned above, the burial chamber was entered on the 17th February 1923, only 'four' months after the archaeologists first entered the tomb. Time/Life can't be referring to the opening of the sarcophagus because, as we have seen, that didn't happen until nearly 'three' years later.
Errors 4 & 5: Carnarvon was bitten by a mosquito in March 1923. The bite turned septic and the infection spread. Carnarvon decided to return to Cairo where his family could look after him. The infection yielded to treatment but Carnarvon died of pneumonia - not blood poisoning - in early April, about six weeks 'after' the burial chamber was entered. (See Desroches-Noblecourt.)
Have you noticed from this episode that Time/Life have manufactured some material for 'Phantom Encounters', another book in their seemingly dreadful series,. As their publicity claims to show a photograph of Carnarvon at the opening of a tomb which occurred months after he died will this same photograph subsequently be presented as evidence for ghosts?
Although these are only the 'light' pieces of the book and take up only a small percentage of its space I believe it is fair to be hyper- critical, because it is 'just' these subjects which were highlighted in the advertising. The main body of the book appears to me to present an accurate picture of the facts, although I do not know enough about them to say so for sure. I recall the story of the astronomer and the archaeologist who were talking about Velikovsky's theories. 'His archaeology was good, but his astronomy was lacking' said the astronomer. 'That's funny' said the archaeologist, 'I got just the reverse impression'.