Authors James Hanock and James Kushlan, along with illustrators Robert Gillmor and Peter Hayman have put together a simply gorgeous guide to all the world's species of herons, egrets, and bitterns. A guide to herons on every continent except Antarctica, all 60 species as recognized by the book, it is a thorough treatment of each one. Each species has a breathtaking color illustration, many times an additional black and white illustration, the common name, genus and species name, alternate common names, when and who first described it as species, maps illustrating range (including directions of migration and areas of casual occurrences), several paragraphs describing in detail their physical appearance, notes on their distribution and population, migration, habitat, behavior flying, feeding, and breeding, descriptions of nests, eggs, and young, and a note or two on taxonomy. Subspecies are noted as well; for instance a two page color range map depicts the 30 subspecies of the green-backed heron, found throught the Americas, Africa, Asia, Australia, and several Pacific and Indian Ocean island groups.

In addition to being a thorough field guide and collection of natural history notes on the world's herons, egrets, and bitterns the first section of the book contains useful articles on heron classification, courtship, feeding, and tips on identifying herons and egrets, including several color plates that aid in identifying the many white herons and egrets that live around the world. An extensive bibliography closes out this work.

Whether you want to read more about the great blue heron or the black-crowned night heron that lives around the local river or swamp, or something more exotic, like the black heron of Africa or the zigzag heron of South America, then this is the book for you. The book will also be of interest to conservationists, as several species such as the slaty egret have very restricted ranges (in this case known to breed only in the Okavango swamp in northwest Botswana) or very small populations such as Malagasy heron.

This historical volume has been extremely well-researched, well-documented, and well-written. It is an excellent resource for history aficionados, especially those with a focus on Mississippi and Louisiana. It describes the people, places, and events that shaped Hancock County, Mississippi -- on the Gulf Coast -- from prehistoric times to the present.

There are countless interesting (and very descriptive) stories contained in the book; the author's writing style makes you feel like you were there -- this isn't just a "dry" history book. The people and places really come alive through the well-chosen words.

After reading the book and then visiting Mississippi and Hancock County for the first time, I felt like I was already in familiar territory!

This book was used as the text for a Construction Law case I took in law school. Overall I found the book to be very good. It was clear, concise, well written, and easy to understand. It also brought a pretty wide range of topics into the mix, and provided a fair amount of places to go for additional information (by way of case law). If I had to complain, and for the purposes of this review I will, I would make two comments: 1) There are areas where a little more depth would be nice. Frankly, I don't think the scope of this book really includes in-depth analysis on anything so this might be a non-issue for many folks. I just found that there were a few times (a very few) when I was looking for more information. 2. This book does a really nice job incorporating definitions for new terms into the text. However, there are a LOT of new terms and a glossary would have beeen a nice addition to the text.

An outstanding work -- easy to follow, yet powerful. It delivers in-depth coverage of current law on hot construction topics. As a General Contractor, I found the book very helpful. I strongly recommend it. The industry has become so litigious that you cannot afford to not know.

After I first read this book, I was inclined to give Hancock and Bauval at least some benefit of the doubt. I believed that at minimum they had succeeded in raising some interesting questions that _might_ suggest an origin for the Great Sphinx some 3000-8000 years before most historians and archaeologists believe it was carved (about 2500 BCE). Hancock and Bauval tell an interesting yarn, with hints of lost civilizations of startling technological and scientific prowess, and of hidden chambers waiting beneath the sands of Giza for a daring Indiana Jones to unearth.

As I read more on the subject of the Sphinx, the pyramids and other great structures of antiquity, however, I am less inclined to view Hancock and Bauval as anything more than incompetent cranks. Their yarn is just that, a yarn and nothing more. Their edifice of "archaeo-astronomical" reasoning is built on extremely shaky grounds, and in arriving at 10,500 BCE as the date of the Sphinx's origin, and as the apex of some great lost civilization, they must ignore a truly enormous amount of careful scientific reasoning. The reader of this book will not be provided with any real feeling for the rationale behind the "conventional" Egyptological views, for if he/she was to have such an understanding, Hancock and Bauval would be revealed for the sad pseudoscientists they are. In point of fact, the polemic of "Message of the Sphinx" is less about a rational basis for reevaluating everything we know of ancient Egypt than it is a retrospective justification for the pre-formed idea that there must be a lost, highly advanced Atlantis-like civilization in the distant past. To Hancock and his ilk, the ends justify the means.

If read by itself, this book will doubtlessly persuade you that what the authors claim has some basis in fact, since it is written so one-sidedly and so deceptively. If you read this book, then, you owe it to yourself and to anyone you foist it on to also read Paul Jordan's recent "Riddles of the Sphinx," which provides a well-written counterpoint to the wild claims of Hancock and Bauval. If all you read is this book, and others by these authors, then you really aren't interested in the Sphinx at all.

How old is the Sphinx? The question, and it's paradigm-busting potential for Egyptology, and history as a whole, is the subject of this compelling book. €Robert Bauval, a Belgian engineer, and Graham Hancock, former East Africa correspondent for the Observer, have authored previous bestsellers on archaeological mysteries of the ancient world. Here they combine forces to question the conventional wisdom regarding Ancient Egypt, and step bravely into the academic no-man's land that lies between history and prehistory. €It was Bauval who made the discovery that the Great Pyramids are exact likenesses, in position and scale, of the three stars in the belt of Orion. Hancock, for his part, claims that the precisely engineered structures of the Gizeh plateau are repositories of complex astronomical data. In The Message of The Sphinx the authors conclude that the Ancient Egyptians were heir to a civilization much greater and older than their own. €The most compelling evidence in this regard was announced in 1993, when evidence was presented at a meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science that the Sphinx is thousands of years older than previously thought. €This haunting monument, the authors assert, with its refashioned, possibly once-leonine head, was created in 10,500 BC. The creators of the Sphinx were survivors of a primordial catastrophe that wiped out most of their civilization. € Hancock and Bauval point to the "followers of Horus" in ancient texts as dim memories of these survivors, and suggest the ancient Egyptians were inheritors -- not originators -- of their complex cosmology. The pyramids were completed at a later date than the Sphinx, and the authors present the extraordinary possibility that these enormous stuctures (particularly the great pyramid of Khufu, with its complex galleys and passages) were not meant as tombs at all, but as architectural maps of a region of the heavens known as the "duat", centered in Orion: the cosmogenic realm where souls are spawned and return upon death. The pyramids were used, they theorize, for ritualistic reenactments of astronomical events. €The author's labours have made for a mind-bending read, though Hancock and Bauval's ultimate vindication awaits the archaeologist's spade.

Here is a revolution in Egyptology. The reviews I've read of this book, the ones who have dismissed it only prove how narrow-minded people can be, after being spoon-fed a certain history for all their lives. Hancock and Bauval capture, in comprehensive detail many of the riddles of the origin of the Sphinx and solve many of them. From other recent books, we know that the pyramids mirror the exact position of the constellation Orion in the skies as it was in about 10,500 b.c.,that they are aligned exactly north, and we also know that the Sphinx and the pyramids show signs of water damage in an area that has been arid according to scientists for at least 8,000 years. The question is this, what if the pyramids, and the Sphinx, were built by a civilization far older than Egypt, not 2500 b.c., but in 10,500 b.c.? Egyptologists and the narrow minded scoff at this, of course, because it would mean a radical rewriting of Egyptology, not to mention human history, but consider this: even the best archeology is just guesswork, no matter how educated the academic, no matter how logical the theory sounds. The bottom line is no one really knows why or when the pyramids were truly built, carbon-dating is inaccurate, and the Pyramids of Giza were built with more advanced design methods than any other pyramids in Egypt, not only the ones that came before, but after. In fact, some that came after are mere piles of rubble now on the sands. None of the bodies of the three pharoahs the pyramids were supposedly built for were ever found in any of them and Khufe himself, supposedly the builder of the Great Pyramid, said in his records that he only did repair work on it, was not the one to build it. History attributes the Pyramids to Khufe and his descendents, the pharoahs themselves do not. The three smaller pyramids to the side of the monument were the tombs Khufe actually built for himself and his family. In fact, Egyptian myths themselves attribute the Great Pyramid, not to any of their Pharoahs, but to the more advanced methods of their "Gods of Old." No other pyramids in Egypt, before and after, were built with the same design methods and scale of these three,and Egyptologists have long been baffled as to why the pyramid progression happened as it did. Who built them then? Frankly, I don't think it was aliens, but I don't agree with the traditional historical assumption either. Egyptian chronologies attribute the Age of the Gods, to about 10,500 b.c., the same time frame that Plato places for Atlantis in his dialogues. Now, before critics harp on any mention of Atlantis, accept that humanity has been around as we know it, for at least one hundred thousand years, and that civilization has only risen to it's current status in the last five thousand, and you can see we are missing more than a little of our history. Humanity has risen and fallen many times throughout the ages, with little that the generations before us built remaining. Accept that, and also that the whole of Egyptian civilization, it's pyramids and it's gods, are simply a copy of an earlier civilization, one with far more advanced methods, and all the mysteries, the inconsistencies of the other pyramids, all seem to fall neatly in place. Hancock's and Bauval's theories are as good as any of the others that have been accepted over the last two thousand years. And actually, no one can even say that they are really right or wrong, mostly because none of us were really there, and no one can say for sure.

I am a hugh fan of Graham Hancock and have read 3 of his previous books, "The Sign and the Seal", "Fingerprints of the Gods" and "Message of the Sphinx"......this was by far the weakest of them. It seems that Mr. Hancock is treading on ground that he is not as familiar with. Indeed, after reading Hoagland's "Monuments of Mars", this books seems weak. But none the less, he adds valuable material to the subject of an ancient connection between ancient ruins on Earth and anomilies on Mars. What I found most interesting was the section on asteroids and comets. This was tangential to the basic theme of the book, but it made me think. This needs more scholarly study. Graham Hancock knows that current Archaeology, Anthropology, and Ancient History has "missed the boat" in many areas. He proposes a key to unlock many of these mysteries. This book adds to that key. I hope his next book is better written.

This book doesn't give any real answer to the Mars mystery, but still on ok book to read.

Excellent book, All I can say is that if your interested in Mars or the true or possible history of man this book will bend your mind in a totally new directions. A Very cool book, a very cool edition to any personal library.

I have not read this book but found that this company was in trouble with misrepresentation and closed there doors. Please refer to this site. [web site]