HAROUN AL-RASHID

While hidden powers sometimes rule in secret, acknowledged rulers sometimes choose to hide their power and go undercover. Known instances of this are rare, but there are two from widely different cultures that stand out. Haroun al-Rashid (c763–809 CE) was the greatest of the Abbasid caliphs. He ruled an Islamic empire that stretched from Persia to Egypt and from Yemen to the Black Sea, and the fabulous splendour of his court and of his capital, Baghdad, is immortalised in The Book of the Thousand and One Nights, in which he features frequently. Haroun, whose title translates into the rather less romantic sounding ‘Aaron the Upright’, became caliph at the young age of 21 but was shrewd enough to appoint good ministers. One of the most notable features of his enlightened reign was the effort he made to improve the quality of life in Baghdad. Numerous hospitals, amounting to a sort of medieval health system, were set up, as were temples, schools and a postal system. Security was improved with a kind of municipal police force. Legal reforms were instituted to ensure just treatment for all citizens (although slavery was also a major feature of life).

Nevertheless, Haroun’s life of luxury and splendour in his fabulous palace was still very far removed from the difficult daily lot of his subjects. Perhaps he realised this, because his concern for their welfare drove him to take the unusual step of going among them. At night he would disguise himself, slip out of the palace and wander the streets and bazaars, listening to conversations and talking to ordinary people. In this way he could discover grievances, find out what was unpopular and learn whether his administration was dealing justly with the common people.

How much impact Haroun’s incognito adventures had is impossible to say, but he was a very successful ruler. In international terms his influence was felt from China to Europe, where he made alliance with Charlemagne against their common foe, the Byzantines. More relevantly, in domestic terms Haroun’s rule encouraged a secure and tolerant culture in which arts, learning, science and the trade and industry that made Baghdad and his court so fabulously wealthy could flourish.

SMALL WOODEN COLUMNS (THEBES-18TH & 20TH DYNASTY)

The 18th Dynasty tomb of Nebamun, redecorated and used by Imiseba during the reign of Ramesses IX, constituted a rich source for Prisse. The coloring of the column center was added by the tomb's second owner. The column right is a painting from the tomb of Haremhab, scribe of the recruits from Tuthmosis III to Amenophis III.

ANCIENT DALMATIA

Abraham Ortelius, in Parergon, Antwerp, 1595
Osher Collection, University of Southern Maine
Shown here are the Roman provinces of Pannonia and Illyria (Illyris), occupying the east coast of the Adriatic Sea and the adjacent Balkan regions. Several Roman emperors, for example Diocletian, were natives of Illyria. The text panel at the lower left lists ancient tribes and places whose locations were unknown.

CASTLES OF GLASS

For years archaeologists try to explain the mystery of vitrified fortresses, without convincing results so far.

Many stones are sintered, but how that happened remains a mystery. The high temperature which is needed for sintering can only be achieved by means of a special oven, not in open air.

Evidence of the very real possibility of such events in our distant past can be seen in the existence of a large number of enigmatic, highly vitrified ruins that can be found in many parts of the world. The scattered nature of these ruins, including areas of Scotland, France, Turkey and the Middle East and the vitrified stones they contain is something that just cannot be easily explained. According to author David Hatcher-Childress, there are at least 60 such vitrified forts that exist just throughout Scotland alone! Among the most well-known of these Scottish ruins are Tap o'Noth, Dunnideer, Craig Phadraig (near Inverness), Abernathy (near Perth), Dun Lagaidh (in Ross), Cromarty, Arka-Unskel, Eilean na Goar, Bute-Dunagoil on the Sound of Bute off Arran Island and the Cauadale hill-fort in Argyll, West Scotland.

Perhaps the best example of them is said to be Tap o'Noth, which is near the village of Rhynie in North-eastern Scotland. The ruins are of a massive fort was built high on the summit of the Tap o'Noth mountain at a height of 1,859 feet. At first glance it appears that the walls of the fortress are made of a blackened, cindery rubble, but on a closer examination becomes strikingly evident that they are actually made of melted and fused together rocks!

What were once individual stone blocks within the walls are now black, and glassy masses that have been fused together by a heat that was in places, so intense that the remains of actual molten rivulets of rock that once ran down the walls like melting wax can still be seen quite clearly.

One early theory proposed was that the forts are located on the remains of ancient volcanoes and that the people used molten stone being ejected from the eruptions to build their settlements. I’m not sure whose brainwave the idea actually was, but it seems somewhat fanciful at best.

That theory however, was soon replaced with the notion that the vitrification was in fact, done on purpose, in order to strengthen the walls. This theory purported that the builders had perhaps designed the forts in that fashion, surmising that fires had been lit so as to temper the stone in order to produce walls strong enough to resist both the invading armies and possibly the dampness of the local climate. It’s an interesting theory to say the least, but one that has a number of serious problems. Firstly, there is no indication that such vitrification does actually strengthen the walls in any way at all and secondly, there is every indication that the fire in fact weakens them substantially. In many cases, the walls of the fortresses seem to have almost totally collapsed because of the fires. Also, since the walls of many Scottish forts are only partially vitrified, it does not seem to have been done purposely as walls that have only been partially completed would hardly have been considered to have been an effective fortification.

It must be appreciated that some of these ruins are massive too, indicating that they were once occupied by extremely large forces. In one section of the book ‘Mysterious Britain’ the authors Janet and Collin Bord discuss the vastness of the ruins of ‘Maiden Castle’ in Scotland which gives a good indication of the enormous size of some of these ancient fortresses:

“It covers an area of 120 acres, with an average width of 1,500 feet and length of 3,000 feet. The inner circumference is about 11.2 miles round, and it has been estimated...that it would require 250,000 men to defend it! It is hard, therefore, to believe that this construction was intended to be a defensive position.” Numerous vitrified remains can also be found in the western United States. One such site was discovered in Death Valley by the American explorer Captain Ives William Walker in 1850. Walker apparently discovered a city about a mile long with the lines of the streets and the positions of the buildings still visible. At the centre of the site was a huge rock, between 20 to 30 feet high, with the remains of an enormous structure atop it. The southern side of both the rock and the building was melted and vitrified. Walker assumed that a volcano had been responsible for this phenomenon, but there is no volcano in the area. In addition, tectonic heat could not possibly have caused such visible liquification on the surface of the rock.

More vitrified ruins can also be found in France, Turkey, India and some areas of the Middle East. Some of the ancient ziggurats of Iran and Iraq also contain vitrified material. Some of the vitrification on these ruins is thought by some archaeologists to have been caused by the very ancient and very mysterious Greek fire.

The vitrified remains of the ziggurat at Birs Nimrod (Borsippa), south of Hillah that were once thought to be the Tower of Babel, are also crowned by a large mass of vitrified stone brickwork and actual baked clay bricks that have all been fused together by some type of truly intense heat.

ANCIENT CRETE, CORSICA AND SARDINIA

Abraham Ortelius, in Perergon, Antwerp, 1595
Osher Collection, University of Southern Maine
Three of the larger Mediterranean islands are depicted here, along with the smaller islands of the Ionian Sea, as they were known in ancient times. While many topographical features and settlements are delineated, gaps in historical and geographic knowledge are noted in the panels at the bottom, which list places and cities whose locations were uncertain or unknown.

HATHOR COLUMNS (18TH DYNASTY) [SIC]

In temples and chapels dedicated to Hathor, columns were often crowned with a likeness of the goddess. The columns, used from the New Kingdom to the Roman period, evolved in style during the centuries. Left, the column bears the names of Amenophis III and Hathor, and possibly originates from the same chapel as the lost column in from Karnak. The crack in the stone indicates that it was found broken in two. The column center is from a painting in a Theban tomb, and the Hathor column right is from the Ptolemaic temple of Deir el-Medina

PETER I UNDERCOVER

Peter I (1672–1725), was the tsar who made Russia a Great Power and a military force to be reckoned with, starting the long, painful process of westernising and modernising the country. He was successful enough to be called ‘the Great’. One of the key episodes of his reign was the Grand Embassy of 1697–1698, during which the Tsar travelled incognito.

As a youth growing up in Russia, Peter had spent much time in and around the enclave where the European traders and workers were based. Here he had learnt much about the ‘advanced’ science and technology of the West, especially his favourite topic shipbuilding, and had grown accustomed to the informality of life among the Europeans. This was in stark contrast to the regimented life he was expected to lead as tsar.

In 1694 Peter attained full control of the country and immediately started a limited programme of shipbuilding. He also launched campaigns against the Ottoman Turks to the south, in an attempt to secure access to the sea for his then landlocked country. After early reverses, Peter’s drive and ingenuity won through, but the Russian military was weak and old-fashioned and eventually these gains had to be surrendered. His experiences against the Turks probably helped to convince Peter that Russia desperately needed Western technology, innovation and support if she was to become a significant power.

In 1697 Peter organised a delegation of 250 Russian officials and some of their European advisors to tour a number of European countries. It was to be known as the Grand Embassy. Led by one of Peter’s best friends, Admiral Francois Lefort, a Swiss, the group would travel to the West to try and win support for a Grand Alliance against the Turks and also to see for themselves, first-hand, some of the latest European science, technologies and industry. Such a delegation was not unheard of, but unusually Peter decided to join the Embassy himself. Even more unusually, he would travel incognito, under the name Sergeant Peter Michailov. To address him by his true name or title was punishable by death.

In practice it was hard for Peter to travel incognito, partly because he was six feet seven inches tall. Probably everyone in the Embassy knew who he was and he often attracted large crowds as he and his companions travelled. Undaunted, Peter arranged for members of the delegation, including himself, to get work at some of the shipwrights’ yards they visited. Peter worked for four months as a ship’s carpenter at the Dutch East India Company’s yard in Saardam, in the Netherlands, and later at the Royal Navy dockyard in Deptford when the Embassy visited England. He and other delegates visited factories and observatories, the Royal Mint and the Royal Society. Peter inspected ships and troops, visited Parliament and met with Quakers for informal religious discussions.

It was this informality that marked his visit, and helped him to engage with people from a variety of backgrounds. Although in political terms the Embassy was a failure (European countries were more concerned with matters closer to home and had no interest in an alliance against the Turks), Peter’s skill at learning from his surroundings meant that it was a cultural, technical and economic success. Many Europeans were engaged to come back to Russia, to work and to train other Russians. Their impact helped Peter modernise Russia’s outdated military institutions, create a formidable navy from scratch and bring Russia onto the world stage for the first time. He may have failed in his bid to remain incognito, but his ‘undercover’ policy helped begin the transformation of Russia.

CARDINAL RICHELIEU: 1585–1642

The name of Cardinal Richelieu, prime minister of France under Louis XIII, has become synonymous with the figure, ‘the power behind the throne’. Thanks mainly to Alexandre Dumas’ The Three Musketeers, and its subsequent film adaptations, the image of Cardinal Richelieu held by most people today is of a cynical, corrupt old man, hungry for power for its own sake. Perhaps his most famous quote is: ‘If you give me six lines written by the most honest man, I will find something in them to hang him.’ But what is the truth about this enigmatic figure?

He was born Armand-Jean du Plessis, the third son of the lord of Richelieu, the ancestral estate. Originally he intended to pursue a career in the military, but when his older brother resigned the family bishopric of Luçon, Armand changed his professional direction. He studied theology and was made bishop at just 21. Here his career should have stopped. The Richelieux were a minor noble family, and Luçon a minor provincial diocese. Yet he rose to become the effective ruler of France and one of the most important statesmen in French history.

Richelieu was both ambitious and talented. He worked hard to make a success of the Luçon diocese and spoke well in the states-general, the French equivalent of Parliament. To his growing reputation as a capable administrator he allied political savvy, becoming known as a dévot, a staunch Catholic with pro-Spanish views. Handily this was also the faction of the French regent Marie de Medici, who ruled France in the minority of her son, Louis XIII.

Richelieu came to court in 1615 and soon caught the eye of Marie’s favourite, Concini, who recognised his talents and had him appointed secretary of state for war and foreign affairs. His star was rising, but in 1617 it seemed likely to be extinguished. Concini was assassinated by rivals jealous of his power and that of the regency, and Richelieu was forced to follow Marie into exile in the country. For years he languished in the political wilderness, but after Marie’s escape from her imprisonment he was instrumental in negotiating a reconciliation between Louis and his mother, and in 1622 was rewarded by being made a cardinal. At this time Louis was seeking a new chief minister, and with Marie’s recommendation he chose Richelieu, making him prime minister in August 1624.

Once in a position of power, Richelieu spent the rest of his career relentlessly pursuing his philosophy of proper governance. The power of the king, who embodied France, was all-important, and all other considerations were secondary to the welfare of the state. Richelieu was a firm believer that the end justified the means; he insisted that ‘harshness towards individuals who flout the laws and commands of the state is for the public good; no greater crime against the public interest is possible than to show leniency to those who violate it’. This philosophy essentially made him a nationalist, since he vigorously opposed anything that detracted from the interests of France and the crown. It also made him numerous enemies at every level, from the aristocrats to the peasantry.

To enforce this ruthless pragmatism Richelieu used means fair and foul. He defeated the strong French Protestant faction, the Huguenots, and reduced their stronghold at La Rochelle. He tore down the castles and fortresses of regional princes and nobles to weaken their ability to oppose the crown. He changed his foreign policy to the opposite of his previous dévot stance, making alliances with Protestant nations against Catholic Spain and Austria. For this he earned the enmity of the queen mother. Domestically he replaced the corrupt system of government administration with intendants – agents of the crown. He also instituted an extensive network of spies and informers.

Thanks to these spies he was able to defeat the constant stream of conspiracies aimed at him by disgruntled aristocrats, including Marie de Medici. He had several rivals executed. In general, the king was happy to let Richelieu rule the country in his stead, but in later life the cardinal grew worried that he might lose influence and attempted to bolster his position by introducing an attractive young man to the court. As Richelieu hoped, Henri Coiffier de Ruzé, marquis de Cinq-Mars, became Louis’ lover and favourite. Expecting to be able to control Cinq-Mars as his puppet, Richelieu was dismayed to find that the marquis was actually trying to turn Louis against him, urging the king to have him executed. Richelieu was not to be beaten at his own game, however, and it was Cinq-Mars who lost his head.

Richelieu’s influence on the king held up from beyond the grave. As he felt the icy hand of death approaching, he picked Cardinal Mazarin as his successor and Louis acquiesced. When Louis died in ...., just six months after Richelieu had passed away, his will stipulated that the regents who watched over his infant son must follow Richelieu’s disposition for the governance of France, and Mazarin governed as prime minister for many years, continuing his predecessor’s policies.

Richelieu had ruled France from behind the throne for 18 years, and as he neared death was able to write to his king: ‘I have the consolation of leaving your kingdom in the highest degree of glory and of reputation.’ Although he was a schemer and a plotter, he was not motivated by the pursuit of power for its own sake, only for the sake of France: ‘I have never had any [enemies], other than those of the state.’

TOMBS OF THE NECROPOLIS OF MEMPHIS (SAQQARA CEMETERY-5TH DYNASTY) [SIC]

Architectural reconstructions of offering chapels from three tombs in Saqqara are presented here; the extensive wall decorations have been left out. From left the first and third are Old Kingdom chapels, and are, respectively, the chapel of Sabu and the large chapel of Ra'shepses, chief justice and vizier during the reign of Isesi. Both monuments are located just north of the Step Pyramid at Saqqara. The second probably represents a chapel from the Middle Kingdom, one which lies next to the pyramid of King Teti. It belonged to Ihy, overseer of the royal stalls, who lived around 1900 B.C. The reconstructions are based on the work of Lepsius.

THE GREAT FLOOD - SONS OF NOAH

Maker unknown; from a Dutch Bible [seventeenth century]
Smith Collection, University of Southern Maine
This Bible map encompasses a large region of the Near East, from Cilicia and Egypt in the east to Assyria and Nod in the West. It is designed to illustrate the account of the Great Flood in the third chapter of Genesis and the subsequent repopulation of the world by the three sons of Noah. The anti-Papal iconography at the top marks this as being from a Protestant Bible.

The Crystal Skulls

Mitchell-Hedges Skull

British Crystal Skull

Paris Crystal Skull

Amethyst Skull

Rose Quartz Crystal Skull

Aztec Skull

Perhaps it’s because they are fashioned in the shape of human skulls or maybe it’s due to the hint of some dark and mysterious curse, whatever the reason may be; there are few artifacts that have generated more interest than the crystal skulls.

There have actually been several crystal skulls of quite incredible workmanship found in various places around the world though perhaps the most widely celebrated and also the most mysterious of these is the Mitchell-Hedges Skull which has also been known as ‘the skull of doom’. There are at least three very good reasons for this. Firstly, the skull is very similar in form and size to an actual human skull, even featuring a fitted and removable jawbone while most other known crystal skulls are of a more stylized or avant-garde appearance, quite often with unrealistic features and teeth that are simply etched onto the surface of the crystal. Secondly, it is as yet, unknown how the Mitchell-Hedges skull was constructed. From a scientific and technical perspective, it appears to be an utterly impossible object that has been made to a ridiculous degree of perfection by an unknown technique, which today's most talented sculptors and engineers are still unable to duplicate, even by modern methods and quite simply should not exist. Thirdly: It is a complete mystery as to where the skull actually comes from.

The discovery of the skull is still a controversial matter and one that has been brought into question many times. The story goes like this: A British explorer by the name of F. A. Michael Mitchell-Hedges, embarked on several expeditions with the aim of searching for evidence of the lost civilization of Atlantis. He claims that his step-daughter Anna unearthed the skull in 1927 during such an expedition that he had led into the ancient Mayan ruins of Lubaantun, in Belize (then called British Honduras). According to Mitchell-Hedges, Anna (then 17 years old) was searching inside a structure that was believed to have once been a temple, when she found the cranium of the crystal skull inside. At the time of the discovery, the skull was lacking its jawbone which was itself found three months later, about 25 feet away from where the cranium had been found. Mitchell-Hedges says that he felt the object held some special significance and claims that he didn’t want to take the skull away from the site where it had been found and had offered it to the local priests but that the Mayans had then given the skull back to him as a gift upon his departure - a dubious tale at best.

Michael Mitchell-Hedges was born in 1882 and died in 1959. He was known by his friends as a “charming rogue.” At one stage of his career he was even know as “the British Baron Von Munchausen.” He was an explorer, an author, a gambler and a soldier with Pancho Villa during the Mexican Revolution. He was undoubtedly a very colorful and quite ‘roguish’ character, the rather impressive initials that he had next to his name actually resulted from him having joined the London Zoological Society and enabled him to enter the zoo on Sundays. Although I think that he make have actually founded the society to begin with.

Many people found Mitchell-Hedges story to be ‘questionable’ at the time and evidence now shows that his tale of the skull's discovery was probably entirely fabricated. There are no known photographs of the skull among those that were taken during any of his Lubaatun expeditions, and there is no record of Mitchell-Hedges ever displaying or even acknowledging any existence of the skull any time prior to 1943. It is also interesting that when he took the skull on a trip to South Africa in 1947, Mitchell-Hedges himself made this cryptic remark about the skull: “We took with us the sinister Skull of Doom of which much has been written. How it came into my possession I have reason for not revealing.” Yet the story he had always maintained was that it was found by his step-daughter, so why would he have reason for not revealing how he came by the object?

Many believe that the skull was placed there for the young girl to find but if Mitchell-Hedges did indeed put the skull in the temple for Anna to find in 1927 and just never let on about until 1943, then where did he actually get it from prior to 1927?

There are several other theories on how Mitchell-Hedges came to be in possession of the skull and a number of books have been written on the subject. One theory suggests that the skull is actually a 12,000 year old artifact that has been handed down from an Ancient civilization through the Knights Templar and eventually coming into the custodianship of the Inner Circle of the Masons Lodge. Mitchell-Hedges was, in fact, an Inner Circle Mason and may have “acquired” it through the lodge or possibly from a Lodge gambling debt. Another theory is that it may have been looted from a pyramid on one of his Mexican expeditions, which is why he may not have wanted to reveal how he came by it. Another more fascinating theory holds that the Knights Templar had been in possession of it for centuries but had previously moved the skull to Lubaatun many years before to prevent it from falling into the hands of the Vatican and that Mitchell-Hedges had been purposely sent to the site by the Freemasons to retrieve the artifact.

In a somewhat less romantic series of events however, it is believed that in reality Mitchell- Hedges purchased the skull in 1943 at an auction at Sotheby’s Auction House in London. This has now been reasonably verified by documents found at the British Museum which had in fact bid against Mitchell-Hedges for the crystal artifact at the same sale. The Sotheby’s records show that the artifact was actually purchased by Mitchell-Hedges from one Sidney Burney but the Museum could only go as high as 340 pounds. Burney then sold the skull to Mitchell-Hedges for 400 British pounds. So now the question now becomes: Who was Sidney Burney and how on earth did the skull come to be in his possession?

Unfortunately no other records remain of anyone called Sidney Burney. The enigmatic skull remains in the possession of Anna Mitchell-Hedges who, even after all these years, continues to maintain that she discovered the skull, even though the Sotheby’s auction has been verified and there is considerable reason to question that she was ever present at the Lubaatun expedition at all. If there is any truth in the tale at all and she was present on the expedition, then there is little doubt that Mitchell –Hedges actually placed the skull in the temple for her to find. Anna still often displays the skull on frequent ‘final’ tours and she now lives in Canada.

The Mitchell-Hedges skull is made of clear quartz crystal. Both cranium and mandible are perfectly proportioned and are believed to have been fashioned from the same solid piece of crystal. It weighs 11.7 pounds and is about five inches high, five inches wide, and seven inches long. Except for some very slight anomalies in the temples and cheekbones, it is an anatomically perfect replica of a human skull. Because of its small size and other characteristics, it is thought to bear a closer resemblance to a female skull than a males’, which has led many to refer to the Mitchell-Hedges skull as a "she."

In 1970, the Mitchell-Hedges family loaned the skull to the Hewlett-Packard Laboratories in Santa Clara, California for extensive study. HP is a computer equipment manufacturer and a leading facility for crystal research. The studies were conducted by an Art restorer named Frank Dorland who oversaw the testing procedures and the HP examinations yielded some quite remarkable results. Researchers discovered that the skull had actually been cleverly carved against the natural axis of the crystal. To explain: The axis or orientation of a crystal's molecular symmetry is an important aspect of crystal cutting and is something that is always taken into account by modern crystal sculptors, because if they carve against the natural axis the piece will usually shatter. This is true even when using lasers and other high-tech cutting methods and yet this skull is cut against the natural axis. Then, to exacerbate the issue of the object even further, the HP tests could find no trace of microscopic scratches on the surface of the crystal either. Such microscopic signs would be a welcome indication that it had been carved with metal instruments or other tools.

Finally, after a series of exhaustive tests and microscopic examinations, Dorland's best possible hypothesis for the skull's construction was that it had been roughly hewn out using something like diamonds and then the detail and clean up work would have been very meticulously done using a gentle solution of silicon sand and water. But assuming that it could really have been done that way at all, which is the only possible way that anyone can think of, the entire somewhat exhausting job would have then required the combined and devoted services of an extremely gifted group of sculptures, working in shifts and required a labor of continuous man-hours totaling about 300 years to complete. Under these circumstances, experts believe that successfully crafting a shape as complex as the Mitchell-Hedges skull by hand is quite frankly, impossible; as one HP researcher is said to have remarked, "The damned thing just simply shouldn't exist!"

The mysteries of the skull, however, do not end there. The skull has been fashioned in such a way that the zeugmatic arches (the bone arches that extend along the sides and front of the cranium) are accurately separated from the skull piece, and act as light pipes, using the principles of optics, to channel light from the base of the skull to the eye sockets, the eye sockets are miniature concave lenses that transfer light either from the ‘bone arches’ or from a source below into the upper cranium. While in the interior of the skull is a ribbon prism and small light tunnels which greatly magnifies and brightens objects that are held beneath the skull.

Strange powers and manifestations have also been attributed to the Mitchell-Hedges skull. During his years of testing the skull at Hewlett-Packard, Frank Dorland says it sometimes displayed strange characteristics. Dorland says that often the eyes would flicker as though alive and still other observers have reported strange odors and sounds emanating from the object. It has been known to give off sensations of heat and cold to those who touch it, even though the actual crystal has always remained at a constant physical temperature of 70 degrees F under all conditions, and has also produced sensations of thirst and sometimes of taste in some instances. Dorland and other also took strange photographs of the skull in which object could be seen within it such as strange flying discs and mountain temples. The skull has also many times been reported to emanate a glowing aura. Other observers have reported that occasionally the skull will change color. Sometimes the frontal cranium may become cloudy up while at other times it remains perfectly clear, sometimes it will start off cloudy and then clear right up as if the space within the skull had ‘disappeared into an empty void.’ Over a period of 5 to 6 minutes, a dark spot often begins forming on the right side and slowly spreads until it has blackened the entire skull, then recedes and disappears as mysteriously as it came.

Still others, including Mitchell-Hedges himself have said the skull holds a curse and for this reason it is also sometimes known as the “Skull of Doom.” Mitchell-Hedges is known to have referred to the skull as “the embodiment of evil” and said that “some people who have laughed cynically at the skull have died while others have become stricken and seriously ill.” It is doubtful any such curse actually exists, at least not one that will kill as is believed to be the case with the infamous “Hope Diamond”, in fact, it maybe quite the opposite. Mitchell-Hedges was in possession of the skull for over 30 years with no harmful effects and during that time he actually survived eight bullet wounds and three knife attacks before dying at the age of 77 in June 1959. One other interesting theory about the skull was put forth by Nick Nocerino in the book ‘Mystery of the Crystal Skulls Revealed’ holds that the crystal skulls “record vibrations in the form of images of events that have occurred around them. In this way they seem to work as video cameras of sorts, recording holographic scenes.” The authors believe the Mitchell-Hedges skull is part of a set and that there are actually 13 such skulls that exist and the rest are still kept in a chamber beneath Potala Palace in Tibet. The general opinion of the book is that the skulls are actually of extra terrestrial origin.

Unfortunately, none of this brings us any closer to solving the mystery of the mysterious object for the questions still remain: Where did it originally come from? And, Who made it? The Mitchell-Hedges skull is not the only crystal skull to have been found. There two other skulls quite similar to it though not nearly as remarkable. These are known as the British Crystal Skull and the Paris Crystal Skull. Both artifacts are said to have been bought by mercenaries in Mexico in the 1890s, possibly even as part of the same purchase. The British and Paris skulls are extremely similar in size and shape, in fact so much so, that some have speculated that one skull was used as a model to produce the other. Both skulls are made of clear but cloudy crystal and are not nearly as finely sculpted as the Mitchell-Hedges skull; The features are only superficially etched into the surface and appear somewhat incomplete. The British Crystal Skull is on display at London's Museum of Mankind while the Paris Crystal Skull is kept at the Trocadero Museum in Paris.

Further examples of primitively sculpted skulls are a couple called the Mayan Crystal Skull and the Amethyst Skull. They were discovered in the early 1900s in Guatemala and Mexico, respectively, and were brought to the U.S. by a Mayan priest. The Amethyst Skull is made of purple quartz and the Mayan skull is clear, but the two are otherwise very alike. Like the Mitchell-Hedges skull, both of them were studied at Hewlett-Packard, and they too were found to be inexplicably cut against the axis of the crystal.

However, the only other known crystal skull that comes close to resembling the Mitchell- Hedges skull is one called the Rose Quartz Crystal Skull, which was reported as being found near the border of Honduras and Guatemala. It is not clear in color and is slightly larger than the Mitchell-Hedges, but boasts a comparable level of craftsmanship, including a removable lower jaw. And as is also the case with the Mitchell-Hedges Skull, many have attributed strange and psychic properties to the Rose Quartz Skull.

The history of the Amethyst skull is unclear; it was reportedly part of a collection of crystal skulls that were in the possession of the Mexican President Diaz from 1876-1910, but there are also reports that the skull was discovered in the Oaxaca area (Mexico) and was handed down from generation to generation through an order of Mayan Priests. It now believed to reside in San Jose, California with a group of businessmen who have apparently offered it for sale.

Regardless of any earthly or unearthly properties the crystal skulls may or may not possess, the question still remains: where did they come from? There are countless theories on the subject some suggest that they are the creation of some higher intelligence. Others believe they were created by extraterrestrials or a legacy left behind from beings that lived in Atlantis or Lemuria. Where ever they come from and whatever their purpose, there can be no doubt that in the intriguing realm of ancient artifacts, there are few antiquities that are as thought provoking or have brought more controversy and debate as these carved crystal skulls.

The Museum of Man, in London also contains a crystal skull of indeterminate origin that was purchased by them at the turn of the last century from an antiquity dealer in New York. The Man Museum skull is called the Aztec Skull. It is interesting to note that the museum no longer keeps it on display, though it can be viewed by request. This is because several museum personnel as well as many visitors have claimed that the skull moves on its own within the glass case in which it is enclosed.

DROMOS OE THE GREAT TEMPLE AT KARNAK

The western approach to the Great Temple of Amun in Thebes is lined with ram-sphinxes. This reconstruction is a view from the entrance of the temple looking west toward a platform, where the god appeared to the people during processions. In the distance are the Nile and the desert beyond.

MAP OF THE RUINS OF TELL EL-AMARNA (18TH DYNASTY)

Akhenaten moved his capital to the barren site of Tell el-Amarna, where a city was designed and built. Soon after his death, the town was abandoned and its stones were used elsewhere in building projects. This map, by G. Erbkam, an architect with the Lepsius expedition in the 1840s, was part of an extensive plan of the visible ruins of Tell el- Amama.

Climb Chimborazo and See the World

Alexander von Humboldt, Vegetation zones on Mount Chimborazo (Alexander von Humboldt and A.G. Bonpland, Geographie der Pflanzen in den Tropenländern, ein Naturgemälde der Anden, gegründet auf Beobachtungen und Messungen, welche vom 10. Grade nördlicher bis zum 10. Grade südlicher Breite angestellt worden sind, in den Jahren 1799 bis 1803, Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin, Kartenabteilung).

Peter J. Bowler

Why was Charles Darwin so eager to join H.M.S. Beagle on its voyage to South America? Part of the answer lies in the fact that as a student at Cambridge he had been enthralled by Alexander von Humboldt's writings about South America. Darwin longed to follow Humboldt on a voyage to the tropics. He was inspired by Humboldt's vision of a new science that would uncover the multitude of relationships maintaining Earth's physical structure and governing the lives of its plant, animal, and human inhabitants.

Nor was he the only one to be inspired. A whole generation of naturalists participated in what historians have called "Humboldtian science" (1-3). This was a project to measure and map every feature of the Earth, with the aim not of mere description but of throwing light on the ways in which physical and organic processes interact to sustain and develop the world in which we live. The Humboldtian vision was not a static one: It incorporated the new science of geology, which explained how the current state of Earth and its inhabitants had been formed by natural processes. In this important respect, Darwin's theory of evolution, in which populations are shaped by adaptation to an ever-changing world, was a direct (if unanticipated) product of Humboldtian science. Modern efforts to create a science of the environment also derive from this vision.

Humboldt straddled the transition from the 18th-century Age of Enlightenment to the Romantic era of the early 19th century. Historians still debate his position within the cultural developments of the time (4-6). His vision of nature as a complex system of interactions that we perceive through the imagination as well as the senses certainly resonates with the Romantic worldview of Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, whom Humboldt knew and admired (6, 7). For Humboldt, humanity's perception of nature's unity and power was as much aesthetic as it was rational, a visionfar more in tune with Romanticism than with the dry natural theology of Darwin's mentors.

But his passion for precise description and accurate measurement reflects the more rationalist attitude of the Enlightenment (4, 5, 8). His concern for the predicament of the human inhabitants of the regions he visited has led some to see him as a political radical, in the tradition of the Enlightenment and the French Revolution. In the end, he defies assignment to any of the neat categories erected by historians, and perhaps it is this versatility that allowed him to influence so many later developments.

Humboldt was born in Berlin on 14 September 1769. He studied at the universities of Frankfurt and Göttingen, and then moved on to the mining academy of Freiburg in Saxony. Here he came under the influence of the geologist Abraham Gottlob Werner, who was pioneering the study of what we would now call the stratigraphic column. Through years of study, diplomatic work, and as a leader of the Prussian mining service, Humboldt expanded his knowledge of geology. He became interested in the structure of mountains and longed to make a detailed study of volcanoes.

Humboldt recognized that mountains were created by earth movements and volcanism after the sedimentary rocks were laid down, in effect rejecting the strict "Neptunism" of Werner's theory in which deposition from water was theonly agent of change. As did many European geologists, however, he still considered himself a follower of the Wernerian method. Incorporating a role for volcanism did not upset the project to define the sequence of events defining Earth's history: It merely made that history more complex. He identified the stratigraphic position of a distinctive formation that he called the Jura limestone, which was subsequently incorporated by Leopold von Buch into the Jurassic system.

In 1790, Humboldt visited Paris with Georg Forster, who had been a naturalist on Captain James Cook's second voyage. As an ardent liberal, Humboldt was full of praise for the achievements of the French Revolution. After 1796, he became financially independent and continued his studies at Jena, where he met Goethe and Friedrich Schiller. He performed painful experiments on himself in an effort to demonstrate the role of electricity as the life-force. He was also learning the techniques of geodetic and geophysical measurement, because by now he had conceived the project to create "une physique du monde"--a global science based on careful measurement and on the paradigm that all natural forces interact harmoniously to sustain the whole.

Humboldt was anxious to explore outside Europe and planned a trip to North Africa. While waiting to take a ship at Marseilles he was informed that Tunis was unsafe to visit. He decided instead to journey into Spain, where he prepared the first relief map of the region. In Madrid, he attended the royal court and obtained permission to visit the Spanish colonies in South America.

Accompanied by the botanist Aimé Bonpland, he arrived in what is now Venezuela in July 1799 and spent the next 5 years exploring the continent, often enduring considerable hardships. Everywhere the two explorers went, they collected plants and took measurements of temperature, air pressure, and Earth's magnetic field. They navigated the Orinoco river and confirmed the existence of a connection between the Orinoco and the Amazon. Throughout the trip Humboldt took notes on the conditions of the human inhabitants, and made a particular study of the economics and politics of Mexico.

In June 1802, Humboldt set out to climb the volcanic mount Chimborazo in the Andes, then thought to be the highest mountain in the world. Although they did not reach the summit, Humboldt and his party ascended to nearly 20,000 feet, the highest point then reached by any European mountaineer. Humboldt was now convinced that volcanoes form in regular lines along fissures in Earth's crust.

In 1804, Humboldt paid a brief visit to the United States before returning to Europe. After further travels in Germany and Italy he settled down in Paris, where he remained until 1827. Here he prepared his results for publication, eventually bankrupting himself because of the enormous cost of producing maps and illustrations. He returned to Berlin to serve as an adviser to the government. He had long wanted to explore Asia to compare the region with what he had observed in South America. When invited by the Czar to explore Russia in 1829, he was able to extend the trip into a major survey of Siberia.

In his publications, Humboldt described a vast range of phenomena, stressing the interactions between the physical, organic, and human worlds. He also pioneered new ways of mapping and depicting relationships (4).Humboldt used cross sections to illustrate the diversity of terrain across extended landmasses. A famous diagram of Chimborazo, published in his Essai sur la geographie des plantes of 1807, describes the zones of vegetation at successive levels, showing how altitude could affect the local climate (6). In 1817, Humboldt introduced the concept of the isotherm to link areas with similar temperatures on a map, again showing how altitude and latitude affected the climate.

It was the interaction of the general with the particular that so fascinated Humboldt. He wanted to understand the general laws of nature, but he knew that the processes governed by those laws were shaped by the local environment in a host of ways not anticipated by earlier naturalists. Yet all these diverse phenomena were integrated into a harmonious whole, and it was Humboldt's aim to understand the relationships involved. To some scholars, this ambition reveals his commitment to the Romantic vision of nature.

At the same time, Humboldt was concerned with the significance to humans of the natural environment. He was ever alert to the ways in which political structures interfered with the ways in which the inhabitants of a region sought to gain their livelihoods. Nicolaas Rupke argues that it was his political and economic study of Mexico, published between 1808 and 1811, that did most to bring him to the world's attention--and this was more a product of Enlightenment liberalism than of Romanticism (5).

But throughout his work, Humboldt stressed how human values shape our perception of nature, in effect becoming the model through which our vision of the world is constructed (9). His Ansichten der Natur (Views of Nature) of 1808 offered an "aesthetic treatment of natural history"--part travel book, part celebration of the diversity of natural phenomena, but all presented to inspire as well as inform. His last great work, Kosmos (1845 to 1862), included accounts of the history of science and discussions of the significance of changing artistic perceptions of nature, especially in landscape painting (10). These elements reveal a focus on the human dimension in science that leftHumboldt increasingly isolated from the scientific community in his later years. He died on 6 May 1859.

Humboldt stressed how human values shape our perception of nature, in effect becoming the model through which our vision of the world is constructed. It was the more empirical aspects of "Humboldtian science" that inspired Darwin and his generation to think about the world in a more interactive way (1, 3). Humboldt's plant geography encouraged Alphonse de Candolle and, through him, a later generation of biologists, who would found what we now call ecology (2). His work in geology and geophysics served as a model for the geological and other surveys that became an important component of mid-19th-century science.

Humboldt had openly appealed to the Royal Society of London and the British Association for the Advancement of Science to lobby the British government for the creation of a world-wide chain of magnetic observatories. Under the direction of Sir Edward Sabine, stations were established in Montreal, Tasmania, the Cape of Good Hope, and Bombay, and Sir James Ross commanded a naval expedition to the Antarctic. Ross located the magnetic south pole, and Sabine's coordinated observations eventually revealed the link between magnetic storms and sunspot activity.

And, of course, Darwin was inspired to visit the tropics, leading to his decision to join the Beagle, his discoverieson the Galapagos islands, and his theory of natural selection. Darwin drew on a variety of sources, but Humboldt's influence, together with that of Charles Lyell, formed the basis of his conviction that the driving force of organic change is the complex web of interactions by which a population adapts to its ever-changing local environment.

Darwin, too, linked the human species into nature. But his theory turned Humboldt's vision on its head as effectively as it demolished the natural theology of William Paley. Despite his lack of explicit religious commitment, Humboldt saw the world as a unified whole whose structure is best revealed by the human imagination. If this vision of nature was Romantic rather than Christian in origin, it was equally vulnerable to the process of erosion begun by the evolutionists. For Darwin, the natural processes of evolution had created the human mind and shaped the way it perceived the world. Humans were not the centerpiece of creation, nor was their aesthetic response to the world a significant factor to be taken into account in the development of a scientific explanation of its origin and structure.

Darwin explored the same complex of interactions as Humboldt, but created a darker picture in which we were the products of forces that owe nothing to our values or our imagination. The mid-19th century's fascination with the idea of progress was in some respects a desperate attempt to retain a special role for humanity as the goal of creation. This was a role which Humboldt had taken for granted but which Darwinism threatened to undermine.

References and Notes

1. S. F. Cannon, Science in Culture: The Early Victorian Period (Science History Publications, New York, 1978).
2. M. Nicolson, Hist. Sci. 25, 167 (1987).
3. P. J. Bowler, The Earth Encompassed: A History of the Environmental Sciences (Norton, New York, 1993).
4. A. M. C. Godlewska, in Geography and Enlightenment, D. N. Livingstone and C. W. J. Withers, Eds. (Univ. of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1999), pp. 236-275.
5. N. Rupke, in Geography and Enlightenment, D. N. Livingstone and C. W. J. Withers, Eds. (Univ. of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1999), pp. 319-339.
6. M. Nicolson, in Romanticism and the Sciences, A. Cunningham and N. Jardine, Eds. (Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1990), pp. 169-185.
7. M. Bowen, Empiricism and Geographical Thought: From Francis Bacon to Alexander von Humboldt(Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1981).
8. D. N. Livingstone, The Geographical Tradition: Episodes in the History of a Contested Enterprise (Blackwell, Oxford, 1992).
9. M. Dettelbach, in Visions of Empire: Voyages, Botany, and Representations of Nature, D. P. Miller and P. H. Reill, Eds. (Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1996), pp. 258-292.
10. A. von Humboldt, Cosmos, reprint of vol. 1, introduction by N. Rupke (Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, Baltimore, MD, 1997).
11. Portrait by F. Georg, exhibited at Staatliche Museen zu Berlin. Reprinted with permission.

---

P. J. Bowler is in the History of Science Program, School of Anthropological Studies, Queen's University, Belfast BT7 1NN, UK.

ENTABLATURES & FLORAL FRIEZES (NECROPOLIS OF THEBES-18TH & 20TH DYNASTIES)

Flowers, like the blue lotus or the papyrus, are the main motif in these patterns. These flowers imitate actual wreaths used as decoration on the walls of houses of the period. The friezes shown in the corners above use the Khekeru pattern, a traditional decorative motif used along the top of walls throughout Egyptian history. These New Kingdom patterns are from private Theban tombs, and often formed the upper border of scenes painted in the first chamber.

Ptolemy world map -Modernised

Ptolemy's Goal
The introduction to Geography states what Ptolemy wanted to accomplish, which includes an explanation of the principles of cartography such as giving coordinates to places around the world and geographic features as well as recommendations for making world and regional maps. He then starts his coverage of the world with Europe in Books 2 and 3. He goes on to cover Africa in Book 4 and covers Asia and summarizes his findings in Books 5-8. Geography included 26 colorized regional maps as well as one map of the "known world". Ptolemy stayed away from orthogonal (or cylindrical) world mapping in favor of three other projection types.

Importance of Ptolemy's Geography
Ptolemy's work has been discovered and used through the ages by several noted people around the world. Arabic writer al-Mas'udi, while writing around 956, mentioned a colored map of the Geography which had 4530 cities and over 200 mountains. Byzantine monk Maximus Planudes found a copy of the Geography in 1295, and since there were no maps in his copy, he drew his own based on the coordinates found in the text. The first Latin translation of the Geography was made in 1406 by Florentine Jacobus Angelus, and since this, various translations in other languages have been made available to people all over the world. However, the most important discovery of Ptolemy's Geography may have been made by Christopher Columbus. Columbus obtained one of the first Latin editions of the book (an edition printed in 1475) without the maps. We know that he definitely considered Ptolemy's distances while he was creating his own maps since his text of the Geography has some annotations in it and bears his signature (this text is currently in Madrid). In fact, scholars believe that Ptolemy's information may have encouraged Columbus to make his famous voyage.


LINK

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN ITALY

Abraham Ortelius, in Parergon, Antwerp, 1595
Osher Collection, University of Southern Maine
This map, oriented with east at the top, shows the ancient Greek seaport colonies in southern Italy, known as Magna Graecia. Major cities included Tarentum, Croton and Heraclea. The latter was the site of the famous battle in which Pyrrhus, king of Epirus, sustained devastating losses in defeating the Romans, giving rise to the term "Pyrrhic victory."