Kristen Dobbin
Interpretations of an
Interpretation:
Faults in Temple’s
Theory Based on the Ethnographic Method
Department of
Anthropology
McGill
University
April 13th, 2007
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons
Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License. To view a copy of
this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ or send a
letter to Creative Commons, 171 Second Street, Suite 300, San Francisco, California, 94105, USA.
Introduction
Robert Temple shocked the world in 1976 with his book
entitled The Sirius Mystery, which
claims extraterrestrial contact as a basis for Dogon
beliefs systems. Temple’s theory is
centrally based on Marcel Griaule and Germaine Dieterlan’s ethnographic
work, Le Renard
Pale, from 1965 in which they set out an intricate creation story for the Dogon culture. Within this mythology was the claim that the
Dogon were acutely aware of the specifics of the
Sirius star system. Temple, working
from his own interpretations of Marcel Griaule’s
ethnography, questioned how it was possible that a “primitive” tribe in Africa,
without modern scientific equipment, could have obtained knowledge of the characteristics
of the star Sirius and of the existence of the secondary star, Sirius B. While Temple
resolved this question through his hypothesis of early extraterrestrial
contact, the ethnography on which his theory was grounded was being criticized
for inaccuracies related to the ethnographic method itself. Not only did Temple
interpret the work of Griaule and Dieterlan,
but Griaule and Dieterlan
similarly interpreted the culture of the Dogon. The
weakness is Temple’s theory derives
largely from his poor background knowledge of anthropological methods,
resulting in the uncritical and improper use of Griaule’s
ethnography to formulate his ideas.
Robert Temple:
Intellectual Biography
Temple received
his degree in Oriental Studies and Sanksrit at the University
of Philadelphia, in Pennsylvania. He is also a fellow of the Royal Astronomical
Society (Wikipedia 2007). Temple
has no previous background in anthropology or archaeology, despite the fact
that his theories spring from these disciplines. In fact, Temple
admits that he was first introduced to the Dogon
through an article by Griaule and Dieterlan
in a journal called African Worlds
(Temple 1998: 41). He then went to the Royal Anthropological Institute to
uncover what he could about the Dogon. From the information
he retrieved, Temple began to
formulate his theory of extraterrestrial visitors from Sirius. Reading the
ethnography at face value resulted in the creation of an erroneous theory
because of Temple’s lack of
grounding in the disciplines of anthropology and archaeology. As in any other
academic field, anthropology has developed a specific professional lexicon,
nomenclature and conventions of writing and research (Erickson, “Conclusion,”
2006: 525). This often makes it difficult for
outsiders, such as Temple, to
interpret and understand the subtleties within anthropological writings.
Theoretical
Specificity in the Anthropological Framework
Specific contextual knowledge is important for understanding
the shape of the discipline of anthropology. Widespread academic and cultural
upheavals of the 1960’s and 1970’s, including feminism, civil rights, the cold
war, and post-colonialism, resulted in an increased interested in critiquing
and deconstructing the empirical foundations of the discipline and its initial
scholars (Erickson, “Overview,” 2006: 238). This trend has continued into the
post-modern era, and issues of objectivity, including problems with
authoritative interpretation, bias and selective retention of information, have
remained central in anthropological discourse.
Since the mid 20th-century, the scientific objectivity so
highly valued by anthropologists has been scrutinized. The ethnography, now
criticized as an interpretation itself, is no longer seen as a social reality,
but as a construction. Ethnographies “are, thus, fictions;
fictions in the sense that they are ‘something made,’ ‘something fashioned’” (Geertz 2006: 326). “It has become commonplace that
ethnographies are ‘double-mediated,’ shaped by the ideas and preconceptions of
both ethnographer and informants. They are a ‘tale of two cultures-the
fieldworkers and the others’” (Van Beek 1991: 139).
This trend towards the recognition of the subjectivity of the discipline and
towards a more reflexive theoretical approach has led to a number of critiques
of early 20th century ethnographic works, which were often written
within a colonial framework. As someone untrained in the specifics of the
discipline of anthropology, Temple
would likely not have been fully aware of the theoretical issues within Griaule’s “classic” ethnography when he appropriated it for
his theories. The specific “dialect” and discourses that have surrounded
anthropological theory in the modern and post-modern era, in this case issues
in Griaule’s ethnography,
were either ignored or were completely unknown to Temple.
Marcel Griaule’s Original Ethnography
Griaule’s work with the Dogon of Mali in the early 20th century
represents a so-called classic work of ethnography. Van Beek
argues that Griaule’s book, Dieu D’Eau, from 1948 revealed the world view
of the Dogon in a manner of such completeness and
sophistication that had never been seen before in ethnography (Van Beek 1991: 140). This account, based on Griaule’s
primary informant, Ogotemmeli, begins with the god Amma taking a lump of clay, squeezing it in his hand and
then creating the earth. This earth was flat and shaped like a female body, whom Amma then had intercourse
with, creating the fox and the original Nommo twins
from the first water. The twins gave the mother earth fibre
for clothing, creating the eight spirals of the sun as a repository for
moisture, wind and tornadoes. The fox was given the power of speech and
prediction. Amma then created humans from clay, with
the help of the male and female Nommo. They produced
the first eight original humans, the ancestors of the Dogon.
From there, the Nommo created a
complicated stairway to the earth, from which descended the humans and animals.
At this point, the structuring of human society was developed. According to the
text, all of Dogon human life, society and culture is intimately linked to this creation myth. It has been
noted that it is quite evident from the text that Griaule
influenced much of the content of the discussions with Ogotemmili
and also the structuring of the provided information into one coherent system. Griaule also speculatively connected Ogotemmili’s
descriptions to the zodiac (Van Beek 1991: 140). In his subsequent book, Le Renard Pale, Griaule
described a different creation myth to that of his earlier writings, in which
the god Amma creates the universe, stars, moons,
planets and culture of the Dogon. The focus of the
story is the sacrifice and resurrection of one Nommo
(Dogon water spirit) to purify and redeem the earth
from its twin, Ogo’s, wrongdoings. This act of
sacrifice subsequently created the star system around Sirius, of which Sirius B
is central. An ark of the eight original ancestors of humanity descended from
the heavens to create civilization on earth. According to Van Beek, this is an entirely new paradigm of Dogon mythology, quite different from the initial Dogon cosmology outlined by Griaule
in Dieu d’eau (Van Beek 1991: 141). These two major texts, distinguished from
an earlier and more descriptive accounting of Dogon
life from 1931-1947, are questioned for their validity.
Criticisms of Griaule
Griaule’s ethnographic works have
been lengthily criticized for inaccuracies and inconsistencies. Walter Van Beek has undertaken the considerable task of addressing Griaule’s body of works, attributing his negative finds to
the uniqueness of Griaule’s field situation,
“including features of the ethnographer’s approach, the political setting, the
experience and predilections of the informants, and the values of Dogon culture” (Van Beek 1991:
139). Van Beek argues that the pre-1947 publications,
Dieu D’eau and Le Renard Pale are
inconsistent and do not resemble ethnographies of the same culture. The world
system presented by Griaule also depicts a society
that is completely anomalous in the region, though it is noted that Griaule had said that the Dogon
represented a typically “Sudanic” culture (Van Beek 1991: 142). Within ethnographic method, though it is
recognized that the negotiations between interpretation and interaction will
paint a unique image of cultures, these cultures will still be recognizable to
a certain extent. While cultures are known to change and shift over time, they
generally retain certain features “either as such or in the shaping of the
transformation process” (Van Beek 1991: 143). Van Beek’s own research with the Dogon
revealed a culture quiet different from that described by Griaule
in the post-1947 writings.
Problems in Temple’s
Logic: Drawing on the Ethnography
Temple’s main
publication bears the traces of an unawareness of not only the specificities of
the ethnographic method but also of the possible drawbacks of Griaule’s own work. As earlier noted, “anthropologists have
a hundred ways of misinterpreting- deliberately, unconsciously, a lot, a little”
(Bouju 1991: 161). Despite this, Temple argues that
“there is no question but that we are indebted to Marcel Griaule’s
personal qualities for laying open to us the sacred Dogon
traditions” (Temple 1998: 46). Van Beek agrees to a
certain extent, attributing much of the results of the ethnography to Griaule’s forceful personality, his leading questions and
his presence as an active agent in the creation of the Dogon
cosmology (Van Beek 1991: 153). Temple
seems to believe that Griaule and Dieterlan
had no investment or biases in their fieldwork, stating that their restraint in
drawing conclusions from their discoveries, “is the greatest factor in favour of Griaule and Dieterlan’s discoveries” (Temple 1998: 71). But contrary to
Temple’s belief, Griaule had a considerable impact on the production and
interpretation of data. For example, Griaule’s
informant Ambara spoke of stars of different
generations, implying stars considered father and son to the “grandfather” star
of Sirius. Griaule interpreted this as an awareness
of Sirius as a double (or even triple) star (Van Beek
1991: 157). Griaule was well aware of the
astronomical specificities of these stars, which he learned about during his
studies in Paris and which had been
featured prominently in the news at the time. Griaule,
“driven by his own convictions” transformed the stars called potolo and sigu tolo by the Dogon, into the
Sirius mystery by reinterpreting statements from his informants in light of his
own knowledge (Van Beek 1991: 157). Despite the speculative
assumptions in Griaule’s text, Temple
states that areas of speculation are “such treacherous ground. It has always
been my policy, as well as my tempermental
inclination to stick to solid facts.” (Temple 1998: 48).
What Temple is unaware of is that
the ethnography on which he has based his facts is inherently subjective, open
to considerable interpretation and bias on the part of the ethnographer. Temple
takes the word of the ethnographers as truth or fact. For example, Temple
claims that the Dogon knew of the elliptical nature
of the orbit of Sirius B, without any access to Kepler’s
laws. His assumption rests on the statement within the ethnography that Sirius
A is one “foci” of Sirius B. Temple then states that the “technical term
‘focus’ has been supplied by the anthropologists- rendering the meaning of what
the Dogon said in their own language” (Temple 1998:
64). Temple does not question the
validity of this translation or the possibility for error or bias. Unaware of
the subjective nature of ethnography, Temple
would be unable to recognize the seams of knowledge where information of the Dogon and the interpretations of Griaule
were sewn together.
With the advent of modernism and post-modernism, cultures
are no longer seen as demarcated by fact, as bounded and stagnant entities, but
rather are viewed as constantly moving and changing. Cultures are viewed as
porous and continually interacting through diffusion and hybridization. Temple
states that there were no Western missionaries prior to 1931 in the Dogon area, and that the “White Fathers, the French
missionary order, have confirmed this” (Temple 1998: 64). From this limited
knowledge, Temple asserts that any
transmission of Western knowledge to the Dogon would
be impossible (Temple 1998: 64). In this assertion, Temple
implies that African tribes are isolated, uneducated and ignorant (Ridpath 1978). He disregards the possibility for the
diffusion and flux of cultures, despite his recognition of the close proximity
of the Dogon to the cities of Timbuctoo,
Bamako, and Ouagadonga
in Burkina (Temple 1998: 61). Temple
also acknowledges that the French explorer Caille
visited Timbuctoo and the Bambara
Tribe in 1830 (Temple 1998: 61). Because it was not direct contact, Temple
does not link this early visit to the possibility of the diffusion of ideas to
the Dogon. Temple
is not aware of the fact that, within Dogon society,
ideas and objects are easily integrated into preexisting structures and new
etiological tales are mixed with previous lore (Van Beek
1991: 152). While masked as traditional, the Sirius mystery was likely adopted
after the 1920’s when astronomers were first discovering the nature of Sirius B
as a tiny, dense star, giving it a place in the public awareness (Ridpath 1978). Van Beek found
that “foreign elements were adopted and in a single generation became
‘traditional,’” often not warranting any acknowledgement on the part of the Dogon as to the origins of these foreign elements (Van Beek 1991: 152).
The specificity of locale is important in addressing the
impact of foreign influences in Griaule’s ethnography
and Temple’s interpretation. The Dogon were not isolated at the time of Griaule’s
studies. They lived on an overland trade route, near the banks of the Niger
River (Ridpath 1978). Temple
makes the assumption that Griaule speaks for all Dogon when he sets out their world view in the ethnography.
Griaule, in fact, studied a specific grouping of the Dogon in the unique area of Sanga.
This is an administrative centre with the earliest
Christian and Muslim influences and an unusually large population. It is likely
that there would have been a variant or mixed version of Dogon
culture in this specific region (Van Beek 1991: 143).
This is most evident in the biblical references embedded in the creation story
of Le Renard
Pale. The concept of creation itself, the rebellion of Ogo,
the atonement and crucifix of the Nommo, and the
eight saved in an ark are all reminiscent of aspects of the bible. “Nommo is sacrificed standing upright, arms outstretched,
tied to a tree with iron. After his death he is resurrected by Amma and leads the continuing creation of mankind” (Van Beek 1991: 156). The similarities between
Dogon beliefs and the bible emphasizes the
exposure of the Dogon to the scriptural religions.
While Temple is convinced of the
cultural isolation of the Dogon, he insists these
biblical references are indicative that the Dogon
received their knowledge from early Middle Eastern civilizations, rather than
from contact with more contemporary cultures. Islam has been an influence in
the area for centuries and Christian contact began in the early 1930’s, over
thirty years before Le Renard Pale was published (Van Beek
1991: 157). This is certainly ample time for biblical beliefs to directly
influence Dogon ideologies.
Griaule’s specific informants also
had an unusual amount of outside contact. His main informant in Le Renard Pale,
Ambara, had a French education abroad. He was also
aware of other Malian cultures, including the Bambara
and the Sonray. Ambara had
much more exposure to outside cultures than an average Dogon
would, adding to the possibility that Griaule’s
ethnography is an anomaly (Van Beek 1991: 156). In
light of the Dogon focus on the stars in the Sirius
system, it would be right to assume that they “grafted on to their existing
legend new astronomical information gained from Europeans, picking up what fit
their purpose and ignoring the rest” (Ridpath
1978). Again, Temple
assumes in his use of the ethnography that Griaule’s
limited and unique informants represent the entirety of the Dogon
population.
The specific political situation at the time of Griaule’s research, unrecognized by Temple,
would have likely been a factor in the way Griaule’s
information was presented. Griaule capitalized on his colonial prestige and his
informants likely saw him as occupying a place of undisputed power, “with a
clearly expressed preference for specific information and his own ways of
getting at it” (Van Beek 1991: 153). Ogotemmeli, for example, was acutely aware of what it was
that Griaule wanted to hear (Van Beek
1991: 155). Because Griaule was highly respected amoung the Dogon, and because
there is a heavy emphasis on consensus and the avoidance of contradictions,
it’s likely that Griaule’s informants would have
accepted Griaule’s interpretation as if it were their
own (Ortiz de Montellano 2006). Van Beek notes that the Dogon would
also probably have taken any opportunity to reverse the flow of information and
thus reconfigure the balance of power (Van Beek 1991:
154). While Griaule made it clear in his field manual
that it was necessary to be wary of the habitual lying of informants, he never
doubted his own interpretations of Dogon information
(Van Beek 1991: 154).
Because of this confidence, the ethnography is “a curious mixture of the
two; bearing the imprint of a European view of African culture while at the
same testifying to the creativity of the African experience” (Van Beek 1991: 155). The interaction between Griaule and his informants produced in Le Renard Pale novel tales that were
heralded as “traditionally” Dogon, such as that of
the Sirius mystery.
Within anthropological discourse, symbolism and metaphor are
understood in cultural practices to represent a form of reality specific to a
culture. Temple’s theory does not
account for the space reserved for these forms of expression and he instead
chooses to read Griaule’s entire ethnography
literally. For example, Temple’s
entire theory is based on the supposed Dogon
knowledge of Sirius A, B, and C. In Griaule’s
account, Sirius’ two star companions are given male and female attributes,
implying that “they are not to be interpreted literally as stars, but as fertility
symbols” (Ridpath 1978). Similarly, Temple’s
version of a Dogon drawing of the Sirius system has
been read selectively, with much of the original drawing omitted. After this
omission, he then interprets the surrounding oval meant to represent the “egg
of the world” as the elliptical orbit of Sirius B, a symbol which in fact lies within the circle, around Sirius A (Ridpath
1978). Temple then
reasons that the Dogon know of the elliptical nature
of the movement of these stars. In addition, Temple argues that the Dogon are aware of the orbital period of the stars and
places it at every fifty years, claiming that the Dogon
count it as double to correspond with their principle of twinness,
in following with the Sigui ceremony of the
renovation of the world. This celebration is actually celebrated every 60 years
by the Dogon.
This focus on the concept of twins also explains the Dogon
belief that Sirius A had two companion stars (Ridpath
1978). The “two companion stars that the Dogon
recognize are elements of a particular cosmology that would exist even if
Sirius B did not” (Ortiz de Montellano 2006). Temple’s
literal interpretations of the ethnography are often a stretch. For example, Temple
argues that when the Dogon say that Sirius A and B
were once where the sun is now, they are implying the moment of the coming to
our earth from the Sirius system (Ridpath 1978). Temple
takes this as indicative of advanced extraterrestrial visitors from the Sirius
star system. Therefore, even if Griaule had been
completely objective in his interpretation of the Dogon
mythologies, Temple’s literal
reading of the material denies the possibility for symbolic or metaphorical
meanings, clouding any shred of truth in the matter further. The entire Sirius mystery is based unequivocally
on unwarranted assumptions (Ridpath 1978).
The Dogon Decoded
Van Beek found, in his own
research, that the concepts addressed by Griaule in
his later ethnographic works “surfaced only as allusions, fragments of ritual
expression” in contemporary Dogon life (Van Beek 1991: 144). Creation myths are not important to the Dogon and the creation stories expressed in Dieu D’eau and Le Renard Pale
were unrecognizable to contemporary Dogon. Astronomy
does not figure prominently in Dogon religion and while
the Dogon are aware of Sirius as a star, as it is the
brightest in the sky, it is not important for daily life or ritual (Van Beek 1991: 147). Van Beek found
no one outside of Griaule’s circle of informants who
knew of Sirius. In addition, no one within the circle knew anything of Sirius
as a double or triple star, or about the mass, orbiting time or weight of the
stars (Van Beek 1991: 150). Because of these facts Griaule’s post-1947 works should not be read as truth. The
ethnography is the “product of a complex interaction between a strong willed
researcher, a colonial situation, an intelligent and creative body of
informants and a culture with a courtesy bias and a strong tendency to
incorporate foreign elements” (Van Beek 1991: 157). Temple’s
lack of grounding in anthropology left him susceptible to making uncritical
assumptions and interpreting the ethnography inaccurately. The proven falsities within the so-called Dogon
creation myth shatters the entire structure on which Temple
based his theory. In terms of “its
assumptions, method, and techniques, Griaule’s
research can no longer be considered ethnography, for they contradict the
methods and techniques of ethnographic research today” (Bouju
1991: 159). In proper post-modern anthropological form, Van Beek’s
criticism of Griaule has been subsequently critiqued
for his methods of research. Anthropology in the modern period shows an acute
awareness of the drawbacks of the ethnographic method.
The Implications of Temple’s Theory
Though the theory has been proven unreliable and fallacious,
Temple’s Sirius Mystery has serious implications. The theory is, in a sense,
a double-edged sword, and has been appropriated for racist theories from two
sides. On the one hand, Temple
traces the Dogon knowledge of the stars to early
Mediterranean and Middle Eastern civilizations, including Egypt
and Sumer,
who were supposedly contacted by advanced extraterrestrials from Sirius (Temple
1998: 46). Temple proves this alien
contact by noting how these high civilizations seemed to spring up from
nowhere. He argues that “people and civilizations are vastly different things,”
thus quantifying grades of culture in a hierarchy. The theory of cultural
relativism seems unavailable to Temple
(Temple 1998: 47). By stating that knowledge reached the Dogon
via these other civilizations, Temple
degrades the Dogon’s own ingenuity, creativity, and
intelligence, implying that an African civilization could not possibly have
come up with this knowledge on their own. Temple
explicitly states that the Dogon brought the
knowledge of the stars “from the Mediterranean world into an obscure wilderness
area where it has survived the ravages of time” (Temple 1998: 258). Not only
does Temple explicitly state in his
book that the Dogon live in an area close to a number
of cities, but his statement implies that the Dogon
are a stagnant and static group that has remained unchanged throughout time. In
this way, Temple reinforces
stereotypes of the “primitive” African tribe. Similarly, Temple’s
theory has been re-appropriated on the other side, for Afro-centrist thinkers
looking to reclaim history for the purpose of black pride. This group attempts
to recover “suppressed” histories of the true ingenuity and the contribution of
African civilizations to the progress of world society (Ortiz de Montellano 2006). These individuals believe that the
insistence on early knowledge of the stars in Egyptian and Dogon
cultures is due to an inherent black superiority that has been denied
throughout the ages. They even go as far as claiming that the melanin present
in black skin has the ability to pick up energy frequencies from the star
Sirius, proof of their ability to contact the superior extraterrestrials (Ortiz
de Montellano 2006). The Afro-centrists have utilized
Temple’s theory, grounded in a
faulty ethnography, to manipulate it for their own ends.
Conclusion
Temple’s lack of
knowledge of the specific problems that plague the ethnographic method led him
to use the provided information without caution and to interpret it at face
value. Temple fallaciously
interpreted Griaule’s interpretation of the Dogon. Griaule’s research has
been subject to attacks within a post-modernist paradigm concerned with issues
of truth, bias, context and objectivity. He has been disparaged for his lack of
material grounding; there is no accompanying socio-economic data and no
connections are made between ideology and social structure (Van Beek 1991: 142). In fact, “the entire Dogon
question may be futile theorizing because Griaule’s
original data, on which this whole edifice is built, is very questionable. His
methodology with its declared intent to redeem African thought, its formal
interviews with a single informant through an interpreter, and the absence of
texts in the Dogon language have been criticized for
years” (Ortiz de Montellano 2006). The influence of
this cosmology on other disciplines is extensive, most notably that of Temple
and the “extra-terrestrial addicts of ‘cosmonautology,’
who have found, especially in the Sirius tales and the account of the ark, some
of their ‘definite proofs’ of alien visits to this planet” (Van Beek 1991: 141). Most of those influenced on an
interdisciplinary level have taken the Griaule’s
texts at face value. Temple himself
points out issues within interdisciplinary research, though he does not
recognize his own participation within that framework. After the ethnographers
state that Sirius B is scarcely visible, Temple
says that this indicates “their own lack of astronomical expertise, for the
star is totally visible” (Temple 1998: 42). Temple
points out the way in which crossing disciplines has the potential for
transgression and error. Marcel Griaule’s original
ethnography, as analyzed by contemporary writers, was affected by inherent
faults in the ethnographic method itself. Temple’s
use of the ethnography, on which he relied heavily to develop his own claims,
is therefore similarly fraught with issues.
Bibliography
Bouju, Jacky.
Rev of “Dogon Restudied: A
Field Evaluation of the Work of Marcel Griaule,” by
Walter Van Beek. Current Anthropology 32.3
(1991): 159-160.
Calame-Griaule, Genevieve. “On the Dogon
Restudied.” Current Anthropology 32.5 (1991): 575-577.
Coppens, Philip. “Dogon Shame.” Fortean
Times. Nov 2000. Accessed April 8 2007 <http://www.forteantimes.com/articles/140_dogonshame.shtml>.
Davis, Ronald
W. Rev. of The Sirius Mystery, by Robert
K.G. Temple. The International
Journal of African Historical Studies 10.4 (1977): 655-667.
Erickson, Paul and Liam Murphy, eds.
“Overview: The Latter Twentieth Century and Beyond.” Readings for a History
of Anthropological Theory. Toronto: Broadview Press, 2006. 225-246.
Erickson, Paul and Liam Murphy, eds. “Conclusion.” Readings
for a History of Anthropological Theory. Toronto:
Broadview Press, 2006. 525- 530.
Geertz, Clifford. “Thick Description:
Toward an Interpretive Theory of Culture.” Readings
for a History of Anthropological Theory. Toronto:
Broadview Press, 2006. 318-336.
Griaule, Marcel
and Germaine Dieterlan.
The Pale Fox. Baltimore:
Afrikan World Book Distributor, 1986.
Griaule, Marcel. Conversations with Ogotemmili:
An Introduction to Dogon Religious Ideas. London:
Oxford University
Press, 1965.
Hunter, Havelin Adams III. “African Observers of the Universe: The
Sirius Question.” Blacks in Science: Ancient and Modern. (1983): 27-46.
Ortiz de Montellano, Bernard R. “The Dogon
Revisited.” Archaeological/Skeptical
Resources. Oct 2006. Accessed April 8 2007 <http://www.ramtops.co.uk/dogon.html>.
Ridpath, Ian. “Investigating
the Sirius ‘Mystery.’” Skeptical Inquirer.
Fall 1978.
Temple, Robert K.G. The Sirius Mystery: New Scientific
Evidence of Alien Contact 5,000 Years Ago. Rochester:
Destiny Books, 1998.
Van Beek, Walter E.A. “Dogon Restudied: A Field Evaluation of the Work of Marcel Griaule.” Current Anthropology 32.3 (1991):
139-167.
Wikipedia.
“Robert K.G. Temple.” Wikipedia: The Free
Encyclopedia. Feb 2007. Accessed April 8 2007 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Temple>.