Ian Wilson (1) (1941–)

I tend to read non-fiction books a chapter a day, in conjunction with something lighter. So it says something tat I laid aside the novel and devoured this in three days. Unputdownable!
Enlivened with many maps, photos of ancient artefacts, I think my lasting impression was that the author considers the historicity of the Bible- when examined against archeology, other sources etc - in an extremely even-handed manner. Never fearing to point out apparent inconsistencies or events lacking show more independent evidence, the more sceptical reader would never feel he was being steam rollered into accepting the Scriptures. Indeed, I began by wondering if an author who seemed to dismiss Adam & Eve etc as a likely myth, could have much to say to me.
However I found the book FASCINATING - taking us from Eden, through the whole OT and up to Jesus. The author 's conclusion, that "the Bible..embodies real history, and for all prepared to listen to it, enshrines what are still the truest, the most important and the most influential life-guidance messages ever written." show less

To be truly honest - I was bored with the book. The Turin Shroud is a topic that I normally find to be mentally stimulating - but not in this case. This is the author's journey of further discovery into the Turin Shroud mystery - and I fell by the wayside quite a bit.

However, having said that I did enjoy Part 3 - Tracking the Shroud back through history. This actually was a fscinating journey into what could be the genealogy of the Turing Shroud. Full of tantalising bits of information that show more make you think a little bit more about this mysterious religious icon. Fact or fiction - the possiblities are endless. show less

This was a slightly frustrating book. On the one hand, Ian Wilson introduces an extremely fascinating subject about rock art in the Kimberley, that seems to be about 20,000 years old. And it seems to be more sophisticated than later art. On the other hand he indulges in some totally wild speculation. He seems to have done the same with other books...eg the Shroud of Turin......which made me a bit suspect.
I was first introduced to the Bradshaw art when I was doing some work with the show more Kimberley Land Council (with/for) my daughter and we visited the most remote settlement in the Kimberley: Kalumbaru. Some of the local women were trying to sell us art works that they had painted themselves with Bradshaw-like figures. They muttered something about "before ice age". At that stage I had no knowledge and no interest in these figures but was curious about them. Interestingly..but not surprisingly, the local women clearly had no idea about what the original works of art meant either...they were just copying. Hence, Ian Wilson's book, for me, has opened up a wealth of information about the rock art in the Kimberley...but specifically the Bradshaw figures.
He very clearly is not a great fan of Graham Walsh who appears to be the living authority on the Bradshaw figures. Though there is some sympathy for Walsh's dedication to preserving the rock art by not disclosing the locations. In fact, I think probably the best chapter in the book is the last one that speaks of the importance of the Bradshaw art and the need to preserve it and the difficulty of preserving it from visitors, fires etc.
However, I was not terribly impressed by Ian Wilson's logic which runs along the lines:
1. The Bradshaw art shows people standing in a boat.
2. The boat is curved at both ends, therefore it is a sea going boat.
3. We have similar boats elsewhere in Asia and even in Egypt ...therefore it's possible that the Bradshaw people came here in sophisticated boats.
4. They were boomerang users as shown by the boomerangs they are holding and boomerangs are used elsewhere in the world. (The oldest boomerang is made from a mammoth tusk and was found in Poland....therefore maybe the technology for this came from the Bradshaw people after they got flooded out when the sea levels rose).
In fact, there seems to be too much speculative thinking which is not based on evidence.
Even his assumption that some (or many) of the figures are female is suspect because none of them seems to show female genetalia or breasts.
He also assumes that the drawn figures reflect the actual people. OK not an unreasonable assumption but they may actually be a stylised, ritualised form (such as Christian icons or the Greek concept of the ideal figure). He assume that because the figures are "willowy" that the people must be "willowy" but if a future civilisation finds the sculptures of Giacometti and then leaps to the conclusion that this is how the people actually were in real life....then they will be profoundly wrong. (It would help if there were some human bones or the right age to give some corroborative evidence).
Likewise, he assumes that the standing figures are standing in a boat... (Which would be quite unstable with the sizes shown). But they might be standing on a log, or a curved platform.....how can we be sure it is a sea going boat?.....Even a painting which showed a boat with some sea creatures around would help cement the interpretation.
And the Polish "boomerang"? Well yes, it's flat on one side and curved on the other but the longitudinal shape is just the natural curve of the tusk and the weight would be very high. Would it fly and/or return? I doubt it. Maybe it was just a "collector's item" and the tusk had been cut in halves.
The middle part of the book is full of rather wild claims or suggestions...along the lines of some of the Bradshaw paintings have dilly bags attached to their heads and there is a cult statue of Artemis of Ephesus that has round objects around her chest......could they have their origins in dilly bags carried by early Australians? Well yes. But they could equally have their origins in extra-terrestrial visitors. Or maybe they represent eggs as a symbol of fertility. This sort of wild speculation.... making associations between the Bradshaw art and anything else, anywhere in the world that might be similar ......seems quite specious and seriously undermines his narrative.
I'm also a little concerned about the dating that has been done for this ancient art. It seems clear that the wandjina figures have been superimposed over the Bradshaw art....hence the Bradshaw figures are older. The one bit of dating that seems ok is where the wasps nest on top of a Bradshaw was dated to 15,500 BC. But this is just one dating. Other measures seemed all over the place. I would have been happier if a lot of similar measurements could have been made (to the wasp nest measurement) and then been able to get some idea of variance and some corroboration.
Wilson has a bit of an odd writing style: eg., "Needing particularly to be appreciated amidst all this devastation is that the twin scourges of prolonged drought and...." I think the editor should have picked this up.
Despite the wild speculations and drawing fantastic links together there are some reasonable assumptions:
1. The Bradshaw art is very old...pre-dating the modern group of aborigines in the Kimberley
2. They were around when the sea levels were much lower and the land extended far out towards Indonesia
3. There are pictures of deer in the Bradshaw work and the Sambar deer are native to Indonesia.
4. Seems fairly clear that the aborigines had to get from Indonesia to Australia across the water. But not clear how they did it. Also clear that the highland people in PNG had to get from Indonesia (or Philippines) to PNG across deep water.
5. The Wallace line makes it clear that there never was a land bridge between the two areas ...but they did get very close.
5. Maybe there were some sort of boats, or rafts, or maybe they came floating on debris whipped up by a tsunami. But Ian Wilson's suggestion that they had boats and that's how they got to Australia is not totally unreasonable...though, in my estimation, unproven.
6. There seem to be linkages with similar art forms in Arnhem Land....and one might expect this.
So we seem to be faced with a curmudgeonly figure in the form of Graham Walsh who won't disclose locations and is very secretive about his work. He has formed associations with wealthy benefactors who have placed large segments of the art off limits...on the grounds that visitors will destroy it. (Maybe they are right). But it is clearly a public good and we really need to know more about it to understand Australian history better.
My impression is that it may just be possible to skill the Kalumbaru people (and others in other areas) up so that they can take care of the art and manage it.....though it's over a vast area and the track record with the bungled attempts to "refresh" the Wandjina art do not inspire confidence.
I was also amused by the comment by Billy King (Elder of West Kimberley) about Mowaljarlai..an aboriginal author claiming a connection with the Bradshaw art:
"Never even talk about Bradshaw paintings before, but when a little bit of money was attached to it. they come an tell a whole lot of stories about it. Well, that stories not true". Hard to know what to believe with oral tradition. I recall being quietly told that one of the senior aboriginal men knew nothing about the plants and trees of the area despite an assumption that he had detailed knowledge. And I also recall that a very senior level botanist was "blown away" by the in-depth knowledge that some of the women (in particular) had about the species in their area. Certainly, the injection of the European influence has changed things and maybe resulted in this loss of traditional knowledge.
But there is clearly a massive artistic resource in the Kimberley, (as well as spectacular scenery and coastline) which, if properly managed could sustain the indigenous communities and provide meaningful careers for young people for a long time into the future.
Not sure how to rate this book. Good from the perspective of raising awareness of the Bradshaws but very poor in respect of the wild speculations and drawing specious linkages with other parts of the world. Poor in terms of his apparent vendetta against Graham Walsh but good in terms of wanting to see the art protected. I give it 3 stars. show less

I read this because I am curious about near-death experiences and (regrettably) hanker after proof that there might be some evidence of life after death. Unfortunately, this book seems to filter such experiences through a Christo-centric viewpoint, seeking to prove or substantiate some of the tenets of Christianity and in particular those of judgement, heaven, hell and even purgatory.

I would absolutely respect the testimony of individuals and it is not for me to confirm or deny what they show more experienced. But this is not the book to examine those experiences from a disinterested or scientific viewpoint. (Of course science may not be the key factor here; but there is a disappointing lack of rigour).

I love reading about the paranormal and associated Fortean topics but remain broadly sceptical if only because many of the writers on the topic (not to mention those on TV) seem to produce such wishy-washy nonsense.

In summary, rather a disappointment. I'm reading two other books at the moment and paused to interpolate this. show less