The Evidence is Cut in Stone: A Compelling Argument for Lost High Technology in Ancient Egypt

I've always been mesmerized by the brilliant artwork and structures of Egypt, so here's a little piece on their technology. I welcome commentary from those who are more familiar with details regarding the tools they may of used, my area has always remained prominently in their art and carvings along with their communication through hieroglyphs, there's still much we don't know about this ancient culture.

Up until the 7th century BC there was very little iron present in Egypt, as this material only became commonly used once the Assyrians invaded at that time; in fact, the ancient Egyptians regarded iron as an impure metal associated with Seth, the spirit of evil who according to Egyptian tradition governed the central deserts of Africa. A few examples of meteoric iron have been found which predate the Assyrians, but this consists largely of small ornamental beads.

Stone sculpture of Horus in Egypt.

The large unfinished obelisk in the Aswan quarry.

Archaeologists claim the female ruler known as Hatshepsut, who came to the throne in 1478 BC sanctioned the construction of the bigger of the two. It is nearly one third larger than any ancient Egyptian obelisk ever erected. If finished, it would have measured around 42 m (approximately 137 feet) and would have weighed nearly 1,200 tons.

The greatest questions that arise are: what tools could have been used to shape this massive stone monument, and how were the Egyptians planning on raising it out of the pit in which it sits, taking into account its immense size. To the former, most Egyptologists believe that round and hand-held stone dolerite pounders were the main tools being used.

Sacred Origins

What Tool Did the Shaping? The idea that hand held pounders were responsible for the shaping of the unfinished obelisk has to be dismissed, and yet, what kind of technology could possibly have been responsible? Chris Dunn's opinion is that if one observes the pattern left by the tool which did the actual shaping, especially in the walls of the trenches that surround the unfinished obelisk, there is an even pattern which would unlikely have occurred if hand tools such as the pounders were used.

They probably carved into the rock when it was wet, or a mold would also be logical

I love this stuff. I too believe they had a more advanced way of cutting stone than we give credit for to be honest. I'll look for it online, but there is evidence of large circular saw marks with a hug radius being used on some stone granite. It's there for all to see yet we still dismiss this claim and evidence?

We still cling to the weak claim that these people would carve and sculpt these beautiful buildings and statues by bashing with primitive tools. No so, and I can't believe this at all. Even down to some of the examples of sanded surfaces with an almost mirror like surface?? Can't be done....end of.

a reply to: Raggedyman

This looks interesting, i'll watch it later when i've more time, thank you Raggedyman

a reply to: Sapphire

@ what tools could have been used to shape this massive stone monument?

Possible harmonic emitting technologies that cut, lift and place stone or other heavy materials...

Being that it would of been a advanced technology it could of came from a more advanced influence then man. That influence though may have understood mankind and felt such technologies left on ground may cause problems so they the advanced ones took those tools with them perhaps...

a reply to: CaptainBeno

I agree. People back then had sophisticated technology. Tools that could cut through stone like the pyramids for example. Each stone was finely cast to fit with less than a quarter inch between each block. I've often wondered if their technology came from something other than what we've been told or have assumed. The sky gods are prevalent in every culture so there's that as well. And they've yet to accurately recreate anything close to what they did back in the day. If you find anything please post it here! Thank You!

a reply to: Ophiuchus 13

Harmonics is another yes, and perhaps levitation. Although with something that massive i don't know. Anything is possible and i often wonder if some of the techniques they used are being suppressed. So much has been done in secret, i like to place all possibilities on the table for analyzation. Thanks for your input on this.

a reply to: Sapphire

Here you go my friend:

www.gizapower.com...

a reply to: CaptainBeno

Oh nice i'll enjoy reading this. Great info!

Thank You CaptainBeno

a reply to: Sapphire

I'm all the way conventional when it comes to ancient monuments and don't think there were any lasers, machines or crafty aliens making them. Nevertheless, some of the images that get posted by the 'ancient aliens' groups easily earn a scratched head and bemusement. The ones which look like circular saws were at work are interesting.

Even saying the unfinished obelisk was normal business for Egyptian workers doesn't lessen the admiration. These folks worked long and hard and someone probably got into trouble for misjudging the scale of the thing and the layer of stone they selected.

a reply to: Kandinsky

Thank you Kandinsky, i very much appreciate your reply. I admit it is one of those great mysteries we perhaps will never fully know the truth to. But the mystery of it is what draws so many, and in that, makes it worth the while.

And to add.. the scale is unsurpassed, magnificent beyond measure! I have no doubts as to your last comment, i'm sure there were a few misjudgements on scale and measurements for sure.

a reply to: Sapphire

Sure makes you think,what is the real truth,for years suppressed evidence to the contrary of MSM,the story's we have been told are far from the truth,like trying to sell you an orange and try to convince you it's an apple,and these supposed decifered texts,best they can do is guess,the numbers don't jive with the words,men and women lie,but numbers don't,these were made with laser or high speed cutting method,made by people about twice our size,and twice the brain capacity

a reply to: Sapphire

They've got a great exhibition at Manchester Museum that's full of AE artefacts. One of the objects is a playing card-sized tin with miniature tools inside it. It was a burial good they imagined would transmogrify into the real thing once they'd crossed over.

Another impressive exhibit is twin sarcophagi with a brother in each one. They had the same father and different mothers with one being Nubian black and the other lighter caramel like most of the AE aristocrats. DNA analysis had confirmed the different parentage, but what I really liked was the way they painted the masks - one brown, one ebony black. I was surprised to see so much amateur decorative artwork on a few sarcophagi. One in particular looked very rushed and scribbly which probably means there was a story behind it. Perhaps they died unexpectedly and the local artists had an emergency job to rush through?

Sorry for rambling off topic. I'll add a couple of good images later on

ETA - Here's a photo I took of the bros. en.wikipedia.org...

This is just my opinion as I am not an expert on Egypt or crafting things out of stone, I would imagine that the rubble left over would be more telling of the tools used then the basically shaped obelisk.

The parts that were stripped away probably were piled up and the inner most layers of the scrap heap more then likely would have been protected by the outer layers. These layers unlike the actual project would not have been sanded or finished just removed and the fracturing or cutting or whatever method that would have been utilized would be apparent on those pieces as compared to the piece itself as these parts would more then likely not be weathered due to the heap hypothesis in the inner layers and probably still laying around as this project was abandoned.

I understand that the Egyptians did not like wasted stone and used as much as they could but again I propose that since this project was abandoned due to a fracture large efforts to remove smaller "useless" rubble may be in tact in the vicinity.

This is just something I was thinking about while reading this thread

Piece of tough gut and sand. You can cut the Egyptian stones with catgut and sand.

Dunno if that's how they did it, but it's been demonstrated.

Or large copper saws with, again, sand. And water for lubricant. That works very well.

originally posted by: Raggedyman

They probably carved into the rock when it was wet, or a mold would also be logical

Except that there's no sense in making a billion molds of different sizes. Block sizes really don't get uniform on monuments until much later. Why would you build individual molds for each stone when you could make one size and mass-produce them?

As to "carving when wet"... try carving jello sometime.

(and no, there's no such thing as 'a plant that makes stone soft.')

originally posted by: Sapphire
I've always been mesmerized by the brilliant artwork and structures of Egypt, so here's a little piece on their technology. I welcome commentary from those who are more familiar with details regarding the tools they may of used, my area has always remained prominently in their art and carvings along with their communication through hieroglyphs, there's still much we don't know about this ancient culture.

Discussed many times, but many of us can give you answers and links.

One thing you should note is that Egypt's history as an empire covers 3,000 years, from the Stone Age to the Iron Age and technology changed considerably over that time... as did the language. The pictures you're showing are from different time periods. The round grindstone was from one of the kings named Ramesses (1100 BC), the falcon is from around Ptolemaic times (about 300 BC) and the obelisk was from about 1400 BC. (reference page on types of tools and materials in Ancient Egypt)

That's a thousand year period. Let's translate it into European history... Hatshepsut is the oldest object there, with Ramesses coming 300 years later and Ptolemy a thousand years later. Now - think about how different tools and technology were in Europe at 1100 AD (Hatshepsut) and at 1300 AD (Ramesses) and present day (Ptolemy.) How different transportation is... the language... the tools... the materials.

And that's the kind of difference you see over the history of Egypt (relatively speaking.)

So Hatshepsut's monuments were done in part with bronze tools while the Sphinx and pyramids were done with stone and copper tools. Hatshepsut's monuments are around 1800 years younger than the big structures at Giza.

I think that it is clear that ancient people had knowledge of working with stone that is lost to us.

When people are confronted with a problem they can come up with some interesting solutions. Now we want to use machines that save labor.

What techniques did the ancient people use to make the shaping of stone within the reach of the technology they possessed?

I think that would be interesting to explore.

a reply to: Wildbob77

Then again ancient people didn't have a labor force like we have today either. I'd imagine a skilled system over a mass labor one.

How about this for a theory :

Any culture that depends on stone for it's buildings will develop very sophisticated tools over the centuries. Once buildings are no longer made of carved stone but moulded kiln fired bricks that stone tool cutting technology is lost.

We no longer need that technology so we have no idea what it was like. Good god there are tools manufactured only a hundred years ago that museums have no idea what they are for!

Modern arrogance coupled with ignorance is no excuse to invent the fanciful.