ISBN: 1931882436

Among the various occult items believed to have an arcane and wide-ranging impact upon human history, the Holy Lance or the Spear of Destiny has a particularly well-established reputation. Also known as the Spear of Longinus, the weapon is believed to have been wielded by the eponymous Roman legionary who stabbed Jesus in the side, thereby avoiding the breaking of his bones. The spear subsequently travelled the ancient world, provoking wonders and awe alike, before being claimed by Charlemagne in his creation of the Frankish Empire. In due course, according to some, the Spear was seized by Hitler who used it to lead the Nazis on their infamous efforts to conquer the world. In their new book, ‘writers and researchers’ Jerry E. Smith and George Piccard lay out their beliefs in the history of the mysterious spear and whether it may still be in existence, helping to bring about the return of the cursed Antichrist himself. There are many details about the Emperor Constantine, the life and times of Adolf Hitler and the possible creation of a secret Antarctic base, at which alien-acquired flying saucer technology might or might not be hidden.

Books of this sort are something of a guilty pleasure for me. I enjoy them for the outrageous ideas and suggestions they may be usually relied on to contain while, on the other hand, I am continually dispirited by what, as an academic, appears to be the sloppiness of the ways in which they are written. The principal problem is with the lack of supporting evidence, of course. No doubt many and perhaps most people will not care about what is easily characterised as needlessly pernickety academic nonsense. However, when I see a statement such as (to choose more or less at random) “Boadicea was a powerful warrior queen, with a spiritual curiosity. It was actually Boadicea who sponsored Joseph and Cassius in their mission to Britain. She became an early convert to Christianity, as a follower of Joseph of Arimathea (p.55)” I want to know on what is it based, can I check the sources too to be sure that these somewhat tendentious claims can be substantiated and would my conclusions be the same, based on an examination of the evidence. The trouble is, of course, that no sources are cited and no evidence is adduced to bolster the claims of the authors. The poor reader is obliged to take what is said on faith, rather like some ignorant medieval peasant presented with religious dogma. This is not congruent with the way in which a careful researcher should write.

This is an entertaining romp through an alternative theory of history in which esoteric artifacts dwarf the power of human beings to make their own choices and to strive to make better and more equal societies. As I have felt myself obliged to say so many times, a competent editor would have improved this book.

John Walsh, Shinawatra University, December 2005