ANCIENT HIGH TECH
26 - A Conversation with Peter Tompkins
Secrets of Forgotten Worlds
J. Douglas Kenyon
For the many who date their personal discovery of the wisdom of the
ancients and the power of unseen
forces with the late 1960s and early '70s. two books enjoyed nearly
The Secret Life of Plants and Secrets of the
Great Pyramid were both runaway best sellers. which. if nothing
else. put the orthodox establishment to considerable trouble
While today notions such as the preference of plants for good music
and the miraculous measurements of the Great Pyramid may have become
somewhat passe. twenty-five years ago they caused quite a stir and
in the process earned not a little notoriety for the author Peter
Tompkins. For one who had dared to challenge so flagrantly the
titans of the scientific establishment. Tompkins achieved not only
celebrity but also. for a time. an unprecedented measure of
Both books remain in print but Tompkins. though scrupulous in his
research. came to be dismissed by the conventional as something of a
Two of his other books. Mysteries of the Mexican Pyramids and
Secrets of the Soil, have done little to change his undeserved
reputation; nevertheless. he remains busy and unrepentant. He is a
seminal. fascinating figure. and Atlantis Rising was lucky enough to
interview him in order to discuss his views on a number of interests
that he shares with the magazine.
Originally from Georgia. Tompkins grew up in Europe. but returned to
the United States to study at Harvard. College. though. was
interrupted by World War II. Initially employed by the New York
Herald-Tribune, Tompkins began the war as a correspondent.
was broadcasting for Mutual and NBC. By the end of the war he was
working with Edward R. Murrow and CBS. In 1941. his reporting career
was interrupted by a stint in the TOI (a precursor of the OSS. which
ultimately became the CIA).
Five months were spent behind enemy lines.
"At the Anzio landing."
he recalls. "General Donovan and General Park sent me into Rome
ahead of the landing. and had they not failed to arrive. we would
have had a big victory. But as it was. we got stuck. Then I had to
send out radio messages four or five times a day about what the
Germans were doing - where they were going to attack and in what
strength. and so on."
During the mission. Tompkins recruited numerous agents who were sent
north to link up with the partisans and help clear the way for the
planned Allied advance. Eventually he went to Berlin.
When. at the
close of the war. Truman abolished the OSS. Tompkins found he had no
desire to join the newly organized CIA and went his own way.
years following the war were spent in Italy learning moviemaking and
scriptwriting and developing a healthy distaste for censorship:
realized the only way I could say what I wanted to say was by
writing books. They don't get censored."
Even then, he was finding his views made him anathema to many.
thrown out of more dinner parties," he chuckles, "for talking about
metaphysical - or what were considered crazy - notions at the time,
so I learned to be quiet."
Being quiet in print, though, has not been his wont. Nor has
censorship of a sort been entirely escaped.
Tompkins believes his
most recent book, Secrets of the Soils, which he describes as,
to save the planet from the chemical killers," was virtually
"squashed by the publisher," afraid of scaring the public.
follow-up on the Secret Life of Plants, the book spelled out
alternatives to the use of chemical fertilizers that Tompkins says,
"are absolutely useless and only lead to killing the soil and the
microorganisms, poisoning the plants and, ultimately, animals and
Tompkins believes such fertilizers to be primary
contributors to the spread of cancer.
The writer has found his plans thwarted not just by publishers.
idea to use a promising technology he had chanced upon to virtually
X-ray the Great Pyramid was apparently blocked by Zahi Hawass and
the Egyptian Antiquities Authority.
"It would have cost about fifty
grand to X-ray the whole pyramid and find out what the hell really
is in there," he says. "It seemed to me that it would make an
interesting television program, but no one was interested. It was
On the recent highly publicized work of the Belgian astronomer
Robert Bauval purporting to show an alignment between the pyramids
and the constellation Orion, Tompkins shrugs:
"It's a hypothesis,
but it's not provable. I'm only interested in those things about the
Great Pyramid that are solid, that are indisputable."
more than "endless theories," of which he claims to have a roomful.
But, he concedes,
"if you think of the Dogon and the Sirius
connection, it's obvious that, on this planet, people knew a great
deal more about astronomy, and may have been linked in one way or
another with the stars. But I'm only interested when someone comes
along with fairly hard proof."
Proof of advanced ancient astronomical knowledge, Tompkins believes,
is abundant in much of the ancient architecture.
"It's obvious that
all the great temples in Egypt were astronomically oriented and
geodetically placed," he says.
He is especially interested in Tel
el-Amarna, which he sees as the subject of a possible future book.
The astronomical knowledge incorporated into the city built by
Akhenaton Tompkins considers "mind blowing," as he puts it.
Unfortunately for his plans, though, Livio Catullo Stecchini, the
Italian scholar and authority on ancient measurement upon whom
Tompkins relied for much of his work in Secrets of the Great
Pyramid, is dead.
Interestingly, Tompkins never permitted Secrets of the Great Pyramid
to be published in Italy because the publisher wanted to omit
The injustice still angers Tompkins:
an unrecognized Italian genius. but the Italians said if you print
it. you can't have the book."
Tompkins's subsequent book. on the Mexican pyramids. further
reinforced his view that the ancients were possessed of advanced
Though not convinced that the similarities
between Egypt and Mexico prove the existence of a mother culture
like Atlantis. as some have suggested. he does believe,
that people went back and forth across the Atlantic."
believes the Mexico builders used the same system of measurements as
"I should write another whole book on the subject of
what was known on both sides of the Atlantic." he says.
During his Mexico experience, Tompkins succeeded - at great expense
and difficulty - in filming the effect of the rising and setting sun
at the equinox on the temple at Chichen Itza.
staggering." he says. "but you can see that snake come alive. just
on that one day. It goes up and down the steps. We filmed it and
it's just beautiful. How did they orient that pyramid so that would
happen only on the equinox?"
Answering that question led Tompkins to New Zealand and Geoffrey
Hodgeson. who gained fame in the 1920s by clairvoyantly pinpointing
the precise position of the planets at a given time.
Convinced by Hodgeson's demonstration, Tompkins concluded that he knew the secret
by which the ancients were able to achieve their precise astronomical
achievements without access to modern instruments.
need the instruments." he says. "because the instruments were built
into them. Clairvoyantly they could tell exactly where the planets
were and understand their motion."
Such understanding. while
available to the ancients. has been largely forgotten by alienated
high-tech Western society.
"We've closed ourselves in." he says.
"We've pulled down the shades on our second sight."
Fascinated by clairvoyance and the potential it represents, Tompkins
has tried to deploy it as a resource for his more scientific
When his own search for concrete proof of the
existence of Atlantis took him to the Bahamas. he used every tool at
his disposal. When one site appeared to be littered with ancient
marble columns and pediments. it was a psychic who told him that the
spot was nothing more than the final resting place of a
nineteenth-century ship bound for New Orleans with a marble
mausoleum on board.
On the more scientific side. clandestine core
sampling of the celebrated Bimini Road convinced him the pavement
was not man-made but only beach rock.
It took a University of Miami geologist to give him what he wanted.
Dr. Cesare Emiliani showed Tompkins the result of his own core
sampling over the years in the Gulf of Mexico. Here was conclusive
proof of a great inundation of water in about 9000 B.C.E.
"Emiliani said. 'They say that Atlantis has been found in
the Azores and found off the coast of Spain and off the East Coast
of the United States. All of these places.' he said. 'could have
been part of the Atlantean empire that was submerged at exactly the
date when Plato said it was.'"
Several years earlier Tompkins had written the foreword for the
English translation of Otto Muck's book The Secret of Atlantis.
Muck's hypothesis that Atlantis had been sunk by an asteroid
Tompkins thought very plausible. and he still thinks so. though it
remains to be proved. In Emiliani's work. though. Tompkins believes
he has found the only geological proof on the subject.
Of course. proved or not. Atlantis. like many other controversial
notions. is not likely to be readily accepted by the intellectual
establishment. The reasons for this seem clear to Tompkins:
would have to rewrite all their archeological schoolbooks if some of
this is proved. If John West's theory about the Sphinx is correct
(that it's over ten thousand years old). it's going to change a lot
By way of analogy he describes a man he knows in Canada
who has developed a cure for cancer. and points out what a threat
such a discovery is to the billion-dollar-a-year cancer industry.
A lifetime of searching the hidden byways has made Tompkins
philosophical about his own inevitable physical transition. While
acknowledging that he is "getting on," he says.
"I'm infinitely more
peaceful about the prospect of death. Like time. it's sort of an
illusion. I mean. you lose the body. but what's that? You've had
many before and you'll probably have more after. Maybe you'll do
better without them."
At any rate. his productivity has yet to suffer.
His next book
promises to prove the existence of elemental creatures. The project
was inspired by the recent scientific validation of the work of
Annie Besant and C.W. Leadbeater in mapping subatomic structure.
Before the turn of the century. the two leaders of the Theosophical
Society had decided to use their yogic powers to analyze the
Leadbeater saw and Besant drew. When their work was
published. no one paid any attention. After all. not only was it
"impossible" to do what they were doing. but their results also
contradicted conventional science.
Then. in the 1970s. an English physicist discovered their work and
realized that they were accurately describing quarks and other
features of the atom that had only recently been discovered. With
such powerful vindication established.
Tompkins now goes into the
detailed work that the two produced on elemental spirits. as well as
the work of the renowned clairvoyant Rudolf Steiner.
"If you put it all together." he says. "and realize these people
could actually many years ahead of the discovery of atoms and
isotopes accurately describe and draw them. and then look at their
description of the nature spirits. their function on the planet.
their connection with human beings. and why it is that we should
reconnect with them. you have to listen. I mean. it's black and
white. You can't escape it."
27 - Ancient Agriculture, in Search of the Missing Links
Is the Inescapable Evidence of a Lost Fountainhead
to Be Found Growing in Our
One of the most curious aspects of history's mysteries is that there
is anything mysterious to puzzle over.
Why should our history be full of anomalies and enigmas? We have
become conditioned to accept these incongruities. but if we turn the
situation around. it really does not seem to make sense. We know the
histories of America. Europe. Rome. and Greece with some precision
back three thousand years. just as we know our own personal
histories. We would consider it very odd and unacceptable if we did
However. when we go farther back into prehistory than Babylonia to
Sumeria and ancient Egypt. things get very fuzzy.
There can be few
1) our ideas and beliefs about the way
history happened conflict with the truth
2) we have collective amnesia
for unknown reasons and/or some combination of both
Imagine that you woke up one morning with complete amnesia. no idea
of how you got on this planet and no memories of your own past.
are in an analogous situation regarding the history of civilization.
and it is just as disturbing. Or let's say that you are living in an
old Victorian-style mansion full of odd. ancient artifacts. That is
pretty much our situation as we wander around ancient ruins and
through the galleries of museums wondering who made all this stuff.
and how. and why.
One hundred and fifty years ago. much of the history in the Old
Testament was considered pure fiction. including the existence of
Sumeria (the biblical Shinar). Akkad. and Assyria. But those
forgotten pieces of our past were discovered in the late nineteenth
and early twentieth centuries when Nineveh and Ur were found. Their
artifacts have completely changed our view of history.
Until fairly recently. we did not know the roots of our own
civilization. We had no idea who might have invented the wheel.
agriculture. writing. cities. or any of the rest of it.
Additionally. for some curious. inexplicable reason. not that many
people cared to know. and even historians were willing to let the
ruins of human history lie buried under the desert sands. That
attitude seems as strange as the mysteries themselves.
Would you simply accept the situation if you had amnesia. or would
you do everything in your power to reconstruct your past and your
It seems that there is something we are hiding from ourselves. Some
will say it was a mind-wrenching visit by ancient astronauts; others
will argue there was an ancient human civilization destroyed by
cataclysm. In either event. we have apparently buried and forgotten
those episodes because the memory is too painful.
Personally, I have
not reached a final conclusion regarding those ideas; however. I am
sure the orthodox theories presented by conventional archeologists.
historians. and anthropologists do not hold up under intense
It is curious that we have developed the capability to send space
probes to Mars and to crack the
human genome, and even to clone ourselves, but we are still fumbling
around trying to understand the mysteries of the pyramid cultures,
of prehistory, and of how we made the quantum leap from the Stone
Age to civilization in the first place! It does not add up.
should we, as a species, not have maintained the threads directly
and concretely linking us to our past?
I have this gut feeling that investigative reporters and homicide
detectives get when they've been digging into an unsolved case for a
long time. We are missing some pieces and/or we are not looking at
the situation correctly, and we are probably overlooking the meaning
of obvious clues because we have been conditioned to think about the
facts in a certain way.
Additionally, we have not asked all of the
right questions. It never hurts to go back to basics and review
everything you think you know and what the real
We have always had the choice of trying to make sense of the world
or not. Life has given us an incredible amount of leeway and freedom
when it comes to knowledge acquisition. Our ancestors mastered the
basic rules of the game of survival during the incredibly long time
span of the Stone Age. They did not need to know that Earth revolved
around the Sun or the nature of atomic structure to succeed.
after the last ice age, something strange occurred, and the human
race went through a sudden transformation that sent our race into
We are still reaping the consequences of those explosive events.
Let us go back and set the stage of early human evolution as science
depicts it unfolding. Our ancestors found themselves in a world full
of natural wonders, facing the challenges that nature set before
them, all having to do with basic survival.
To begin with, they had
no tools and no choice other than to meet the challenges head-on,
just as other animals did. We have to keep the realities of this
background in perspective. We know exactly how Stone Age people
lived because many tribes around the world were still living in this
manner during the past five hundred years, and they have been
studied intensively and extensively.
We know that humanity was fairly homogeneous throughout the Stone
Age. Even 10,000 years ago, people lived pretty much the same way,
whether they were in Africa, Asia, Europe, Australia, or the
They lived very close to nature, hunting wildlife and
gathering wild plants, using stone tools and stone, wood, and bone
weapons. They had learned the art of making and controlling fire and
they had very accurate and detailed knowledge about the habits of
animals, the lay of the land, nature's cycles, and how to
distinguish between edible and poisonous plants.
This knowledge and their way of life had been painstakingly acquired
over millions of years of experience. Stone Age humans have been
wrongly portrayed and misunderstood. They were not stupid brutes,
and there would be no modern mind and no modern civilization without
the long evolution they went through to establish the basis for all
that would eventually happen.
They were keenly aware, entirely in
communion with nature, and unquestionably stronger and more
muscularly robust than we are today.
In reality, the natural world we inherited from Stone Age man was
entirely intact. Everything was as pristine and virginal as it had
been during the millions of years of human evolution. Nature
bestowed her bounty upon those early humans and they learned to live
within that natural framework.
Viewed from a statistical
perspective, the human status quo is the hunter-gatherer culture
that we lived in for 99.99
percent of our existence as a species. at least according to modern
It is very easy to understand how our remote ancestors lived; life
changed very little and very slowly. Early man adapted and stuck
with what worked. It was a simple but demanding way of life that was
passed on from generation to generation by example and oral
There really does not seem to be much mystery about it. But that all
starts to change radically after the last ice age. Suddenly. a few
tribes began to embrace a different way of life. Giving up their
nomadic existence. they settled down and started raising certain
crops and domesticating several animal species. The first steps
toward civilization are often described but never really examined at
a deep level.
What compelled them to change abruptly? It is more
problematic to explain than we have been led to believe.
The first issue is very basic and straightforward.
Stone Age people
did not eat grains. and grains are the basis of agriculture and the
diet of civilization. Their diet consisted of lean wild meats and
fresh wild greens and fruits.
To begin with. we will be looking at the evolutionary discordance
from a general standpoint by examining the mismatch between
characteristics of foods eaten since the "agricultural revolution"
that began 10.000 years ago and our genus's prior two-million-year
history as hunter-gatherers. The present-day edible grass seeds
simply would have been unavailable to most of mankind until after
their domestication because of their limited geographic
Consequently. the human genome is most ideally adapted
to those foods that were available to pre-agricultural man.
This presents us with an enigma that is every bit as difficult to
penetrate as the building of the Great Pyramid. How and why did our
ancestors make this leap? As they had little to no experience with
wild grains. how did they know what to do to process them. or even
that they were indeed edible?
Beyond that. by the time of the abrupt appearance of the Sumerian
and Egyptian civilizations. grains had already been hybridized.
which demands a high degree of knowledge about and experience with
plants. as well as time. If you have any experience with wild plants
or fruits. or any experience of farming. then you know that wild
breeds are very different from hybridized cultivars.
It is well established that
hunter-gatherers had no experience with plant breeding or animal
domestication, and it should have taken much longer to go from zero
to an advanced state than historians insist it did.
We must ask, Where did their knowledge originate? How did Stone Age
man suddenly acquire the skills to domesticate plants and animals
and do it with a high degree of effectiveness?
We find purebred dog
species like salukis and greyhounds in Egyptian and Sumerian art:
How were they bred so quickly from wolves?
The following issues make the conventional explanations difficult to
support: 1) mankind's very slow process of evolution in the Stone
Age; 2) the sudden creation and implementation of new tools, new
foodstuffs, and new social forms that lacked precedence. If early
humans had eaten wild grains and experimented with hybridization for
some lengthy time period and evolved in obvious developmental
stages, then we could comprehend it.
But how can we accept the scenario of the Stone Age to the Great
Pyramid of Giza?
Plant breeding is an exacting science and we know it was being done
in Sumeria, in Egypt, and by the ancient Israelites. If you doubt
that statement, consider that we are growing the same primary grain
crops that were developed by the ancients. That is a strange fact
and it begs close scrutiny.
There are hundreds of other possible
wild plants that could be domesticated. Why have we not developed
new grains from the other wild species of the past three thousand
years? How could they pick the best crops with the extremely meager
knowledge that they would have possessed had they just emerged from
the Stone Age?
They not only figured out all these complex issues, but they also
quickly discovered the principles of making secondary products out
of cereals. The Sumerians were making bread and beer five thousand
years ago and yet their very close ancestors - at least according to
anthropologists - knew nothing of these things and lived by picking
plants and killing wild beasts. It is almost as if they were given a
set of instructions by someone who had already developed these
But it could not have been from their ancestors, because
they were hunters and plant collectors.
It is very difficult to reconstruct these rapid-fire transitions,
especially when they were accompanied by radical changes in every
other feature of human life. How and why did humans who had known
nothing but a nomadic existence and an egalitarian social structure
so quickly and so radically change? What compelled them to build
cities and create highly stratified civilizations when they knew
nothing about such organizations?
During the Epipaleolithic Era, circa 8000-5500 B.C.E., the tribes in
the Nile Valley were living in semi-subterranean oval houses roofed
with mud and sticks. They made simple pottery and used stone axes
and flint arrowheads. They were still seminomadic and moved
seasonally from one camp to another. The vast majority of tribes
around the globe were living in a similar state.
How do we get from
there to quarrying, dressing, and manipulating one- to sixty-ton
stones into the world's most massive structure, and in such a short
This quick transition is all but impossible to explain rationally.
All inventions and cultural developments require time and a sequence
of easily identified developmental stages. Where are the precursors?
It is very easy to trace this path of development during the Stone
Age from very primitive tools to chipped ax heads and flint
arrowheads. That is what we should find as civilization develops.
But where are the smaller-scale pyramids - much smaller? Where are
the crude stone carvings that precede the sophisticated stelae? The
slow evolution of forms, from simple to complex, is all that human
beings knew, not mud and thatch-roof huts and then large-scale
architecture employing megalithic blocks of stone and complex
artwork demanding master craftsmanship.
But the developmental phases are simply not there. Sumerian
cuneiform tablets describe fairly complex systems of irrigation and
farming, bakeries, and the making of beer. The Bible tells us that
the ancient Jews raised grapes and made wine, and both leavened and
unleavened bread. We take these things for granted but the
assumptions underlying them are never questioned. Where did they
learn to hybridize bread wheat and turn it into flour and bake the
flour into bread in such a short time span?
Ditto for viticulture.
These are not simple or obvious products.
We assume that their ancestors developed farming skills over a
prolonged period of time, which is a logical expectation. But that
is not the case. The very first and very primitive agricultural
experiments that have been documented by archeologists occurred in
Jarmo and Jericho.
These were small, humble villages that raised a
few simple crops, but they still hunted game and gathered plants, so
they were not strictly agricultural communities.
The problem is that there is no intermediate step between them and
Sumeria and Egypt, just as there are no small-scale ziggurats,
pyramids, or any progression showing that Stone Age artisans could
suddenly carve intricate statuary and stelae.
The orthodox theories are starting to rely more on the "official"
pronouncements of authorities rather than on well-argued and
well-documented facts. We have reached a crisis in the fields of
anthropology, history, and archeology because the conventional
theses are unable to solve an increasingly large number of
The explanations are thin and threadbare and becoming
more ponderous and unable to support their own weight. The pieces do
not lock together and fit into a smooth, coherent whole.
We have mentioned previously in this book a quote by the eminent
Leakey. Some years ago, while giving a lecture at a university,
Leakey was asked by a student about the evolutionary "missing link."
"There is not one missing link, there are hundreds of
This is even more true for cultural than biological
evolution. Until we find those links, we are like amnesiacs
struggling to make sense out of our modern lives and our collective
28 - Atlantean Technology: How Advanced?
What Does the Evidence Really Show?
Edgar Cayce said that the inhabitants of Atlantis operated aircraft
and submarines. and were in
possession of a fabulous technology superior to that achieved in the
The question of so advanced a technology in
ancient times is the most difficult argument for many investigators
to accept. especially Cayce's descriptions of achievements beyond
anything known today.
He said the Atlanteans were adept at,
"photographing from a distance" and "reading inscriptions through
walls - even at distances."
"electrical knife was in such a shape. with the use of
the metals. as to be used as the means for bloodless surgery. as
would be termed today - by the very staying forces used which formed
coagulating forces in bodies where larger arteries or veins were to
be entered or cut." he said.
Refugees from Atlantis supposedly brought to Egypt,
where color. vibration. and activities make for toning same with the
emotions of individuals or peoples that may make for their
temperaments being changed.
And same may be applied by the entity in
those associations with what may be called the temperaments of
individuals. where they are possessed - as it were - by the
influences from without. and those that are ill from diseases that
have become of a nature or vibratory influence within the body as to
set themselves as a vibration in the body."
Cayce told of,
"a death ray that brought from the bowels of the Earth
itself - when turned into the sources of supply - those destructions
to portions of the land."
This "death ray" may be today's laser
Cayce said in 1933. it,
"will be found in the next
He spoke of,
"electrical appliances. when these
were used by those peoples to make for beautiful buildings without
but temples of sin within."
The Atlanteans were skilled in,
application of the electrical forces and influences especially in
the association and the activities of same upon metals; not only as
to their location but as to the manner of the activity of same as
related to the refining of some and the discovery of others. and the
use of the various forms or transportation of same - or
transformation of same to and through those influences in the
At the time Cayce said that the Atlanteans used electrical current
for the working of metals. there was no evidence that the ancients
knew anything about electricity. let alone how it might be applied
Then in 1938. Dr. Wilhelm Koenig. a German
archeologist. was inventorying artifacts at the Iraq State Museum in
Baghdad when he noticed what seemed to be the impossible resemblance
of a collection of two-thousand-year-old clay jars to a series of
dry cell storage batteries. His curiosity had been aroused by the
peculiar internal details of the jars. each of which enclosed a
copper cylinder capped at the bottom by a disk (also of copper) and
sealed with asphalt.
A few years later. Dr. Koenig's suspicion was put to the test.
Willard Gray. a technician at the General Electric High Voltage
Laboratory in Pittsfield. Massachusetts. finished an exact
reproduction of the Baghdad jars. He found that an iron rod inserted
into the copper tube and filled with citric acid generated 1.5 to
2.75 volts of electricity. enough to electroplate an object with
demonstrated that practical electricity could have been applied to
metalworking by ancient craftsmen after
Doubtless. the "Baghdad battery." as it has since become known. was
not the first of its kind - it was a device that represented an
unknown technology preceding it by perhaps thousands of years. and
might have included far more spectacular feats of electrical
engineering long since lost.
According to Cayce. the Atlanteans did not confine their application
of electricity to metallurgy.
"the use of the sound waves.
where the manners in which lights were used as a means of
communication." he said.
"Elevators and the connecting tubes that were used by compressed air
and steam" operated in Atlantean buildings.
Atlantean technology soared
Airships of elephant
"made into the containers for the gases that were used as
both lifting and for the impelling of the crafts about the various
portions of the continent. and even abroad... They could not
only pass through that called air. or that heavier. but through that
Manned flight is practically emblematic of our times. and we find
such references to ancient aeronautics incredible.
researchers believe Peruvian balloonists may have surveyed the
Nazca Lines two thousand or more years ago from aerial
perspectives. Despite reluctance to take Cayce at his word.
equivocal yet tantalizing evidence does exist to at least suggest
that manned flight may indeed have occurred in the ancient world.
The earliest substantiated journeys aloft took place in the fifth
century B.C.E.. even before Plato was born. when the Greek scientist
Archytas of Tarentum invented a leather kite large enough to carry a
young boy. It was actually used by Greek armies in the earliest
known example of aerial reconnaissance.
More amazing was the discovery made in the Upper Nile Valley near
the close of the nineteenth century.
The story is best told by the
famous author and explorer David Hatcher Childress: "In 1898. a
model was found in an Egyptian tomb near Sakkara. It was labeled a
'bird' and cataloged Object 6347 at the Egyptian Museum. in Cairo.
Then. in 1969. Dr. Khalil Massiha was startled to see that the
'bird' not only had straight wings. but also an upright tail-fin. To
Dr. Massiha. the object appeared to be that of a model airplane.
is made of wood. weighs 39.12 grams and remains in good condition.
"The wingspan is 18 cm. the aircraft's nose is 3.2 cm long. and the
overall length is 18 cm. The extremities of the aircraft and the
wing-tips are aerodynamically shaped. Apart from a symbolic eye and
two short lines under the wings. it has no decorations nor has it
any landing legs. Experts have tested the model and found it
In all. fourteen similar flying models have been recovered from
ancient digs in Egypt.
Interestingly. the Saqqara example came from
an archeological zone identified with the earliest dynastic periods.
at the very beginning of pharaonic civilization. which suggests that
the aircraft was not a later development but belonged instead to the
first years of civilization in the Nile Valley.
The Egyptians' anomalous artifacts may indeed have been flying
"models" of the real thing operated by their Atlantean forefathers.
The Cairo Museum's wooden model of a working glider implies the
ancient Egyptians at least understood the fundamental principles of
heavier-than-air. man-made flight. Perhaps such knowledge was the
only legacy left from a former time. when those principles were
applied more seriously.
The quote from Childress is excerpted from his book Vimana Aircraft
of Ancient India and Atlantis (coauthored with Ivan Sanderson). the
most complete examination of the subject. In it. he was able to
assemble surprising evidence from the earliest Hindu traditions of
aircraft supposedly flown in ancient times.
known as Vimanas,
they appear in the famous Ramayana and Mahabharata and the
less-well-known but earliest of the Indian epics. the
Aircraft were discussed in surprisingly technical detail throughout
several manuscripts of ancient India.
and Samarangana Sutradhara, all classic sources, additionally
describe "aerial cars" that were allegedly operating from deeply
Each of these epics deals with a former age. hinting at the last.
bellicose. cataclysmic years of Atlantis. Childress's collection of
impressive source materials dating back to the dawn of Hindu
literature heavily underscores Cayce's description of flying devices
in Atlantis. It is important to understand. however. that these
vimanas had virtually nothing in common with modern aviation.
because their motive power was utterly unlike combustion or jet
engines. They also had little to do with aeronautics as we have come
to understand it.
Apparently. the Atlanteans operated two types of flying vehicles:
gas-filled dirigible-like craft and
heavier-than-air vimanas directed from a central power source on the
ground. While the latter represented an aeronautical technology
beyond any known aircraft, the balloons Cayce describes featured a
detail that suggests their authenticity.
He said their skin was made of elephant hides. They probably would
have been too heavy to serve as envelopes for the containment of any
lighter-thanair gas. But lighter, expandable, and non-leaking
elephant bladders might have worked. In any case, Cayce says that
the Atlanteans used the animals, which were native to their kingdom,
for a variety of purposes.
The Critias also mentions that elephants abounded on the island of
Skeptics long faulted Plato for including this
out-of-place pachyderm until the 1960s, when oceanographers dredging
the sea bottom of the Atlantic Ocean some two hundred miles west of
the Portuguese coast unexpectedly hauled up hundreds of elephant
bones at several different locations.
The scientists concluded that
the animals had anciently wandered across a now submerged land
bridge extending from the Atlantic shores of North Africa into
formerly dry land long since sunk beneath the sea. Their discovery
gave special credence not only to Plato, but to Cayce as well.
No less surprising are the submarines known to the
early-fifth-century-B.C.E. Greek historian Herodotus and the
first-century-C.E. Roman naturalist Pliny the Elder.
wrote about submarines. His most famous pupil, Alexander the Great,
was said to have been on board a glass-covered undersea vessel
during an extended shake-down cruise beneath the eastern
Mediterranean Sea, around 320 B.C.E.
While these submersibles may have gone back twenty-three centuries
or so, Atlantis had already vanished about one thousand years
earlier. Even so, if such inventions took place in Classical times,
they might just as well have operated during the Bronze Age, which
was not much different technologically.
Ancient aeronautics paled in comparison to even greater
technological achievements, as Atlantean scientists succeeded,
the breaking up of the atomic forces to produce impelling force to
those means and modes of transportation, or of travel, or of lifting
large weights or of changing the faces or forces of nature itself,"
The same life-reading explains that explosives
were invented by the Atlanteans. Seven years earlier, he mentioned
what he called "the Atlantean period, when those first of the
explosives were made."
Ignatius Donnelly, the father of modern Atlantology, wrote even earlier that explosives were developed in
Cayce explained that the Atlanteans were able to create such an
advanced society because their civilization developed over a more or
less continuous history until the final catastrophe. Their cultural
evolution had been graced with many centuries of growth in which to
develop and perfect the scientific arts. The basis of this ancient
technology was an understanding and application of crystal power.
Through it, the motive forces of nature were somehow directed to
serve human needs. Transportation on, above, and under the sea
became possible, and long-distance communication bound together the
world of Atlantis.
We find such a high level of material progress set in prehistoric
times incomprehensible and beyond belief. Yet many better-known
civilizations achieved technological breakthroughs that were
forgotten when their societies fell, only to be rediscovered
sometimes thousands of years later.
In Middle America, for example,
Mayan accomplishments in celestial mechanics were not matched until
the last century. Incan agricultural techniques, abandoned with the
Spanish Conquest, yielded three times more produce than farming
methods employed in Peru today.
At the same time Plato was writing about Atlantis, his fellow Greeks
were sailing the Alexandris.
More than four hundred feet long, she
was a colossal ship, the likes of which would not be seen again for
another two thousand years. A pregnancy test in use among
eighteenth-dynasty Egyptians was not discovered until the 1920s. As
for Egypt, our modern world's top engineers lack the knowhow capable
of reproducing the Great Pyramid in all its details. Certainly, far
more was lost with the fall of ancient civilization than has yet
Moreover, our times do not have a monopoly on human beings of great
genius and inventiveness. That they were able to create complex
technologies in other times and societies long since forgotten
should not overtax our credulity. And if one of those lost epochs
belonged to a place known as Atlantis, we have it on the authority
of Western civilization's most influential philosopher and the
foremost psychic our country has yet produced.
However they may disagree in their interpretations of the lost
civilization, both metaphysical and worldwide mythological sources
are almost unanimous in describing a central role for the
sophisticated technology of Atlantis in its ultimate destruction.
Cayce said that the Atlanteans grew intoxicated with the material
wonders made possible through quartz crystal technology. The riches
and luxuries it generated inspired them with an insatiable desire
They turned the beams of their power crystals into the very bowels
of the planet, excavating for even greater mineral wealth.
Prodigious amounts of high-grade copper, which fueled the bronze
weapons industries of the pre-Classical world, and gold enough to
sheet the walls of their city poured forth from Earth's violated
The copper-mining operations of prehistoric Michigan still bear the
scars of Atlantean technology. For example, some unknown device
enabled the ancient miners of the Upper Peninsula to sink pits
vertically through sixty feet of solid rock. Another piece of lost
instrumentation directed them to all the richest veins of copper
hidden under the hillsides of Isle Royale and the Kewanee Peninsula.
These and similar achievements of the late fourth millennium B.C.E.,
which allowed the prehistoric miners to remove a minimum of half a
billion pounds of raw copper, are no speculation; they have been
known to archeologists for more than a century.
overreaching themselves through their mining operations, the Atlanteans excavated too deeply into the already seismically
unstable Mid-Atlantic Ridge on which their capital perched. They
were blind to the geologic consequences of their ecological
selfishness, and regarded our living planet as an inexhaustible
fount of mineral wealth.
Parallels with our times are uncomfortably
The Atlanteans reveled in an orgy of self-indulgent materialism. But
at some indefinable point, long-suffering Nature rebelled. The
threshold of her forbearance had been crossed, and she chastised her
sinful children with a terrible punishment. Her fires of hell opened
to engulf opulent Atlantis in a volcanic event so cataclysmic that
it destroyed the entire island. The crumbling, incinerated city with
its screaming inhabitants was dragged to the bottom of the sea and
The "great, terrible crystal" - the source
of the Atlanteans' unexampled prosperity - had become the instrument
of their doom.
29 - Archeology and the Law of Gravity
Orthodox Theory of Ancient Capability Tends to Cave In under Its Own
The massive earthmover makes the average street pickup look like a
Rated to about 350
tons, it is restricted to mining operations, as the federal highway
load limit is forty tons and the truck weighs more than that without
a load. I was watching it being put through its paces in the local
open-pit copper mine in Bisbee, Arizona. A bone-jarring flash
suddenly struck me that snapped into place things that I had long
been trying to get a perspective on.
The earthmover is the heaviest truck that we have in modern
civilization and it can haul the heaviest loads we find littering
the landscapes in Egypt, Bolivia, and Peru. At one point in my life,
as I was learning the ropes of the literary world, I worked on a
cement construction crew in a logging town, where I came to know
about handling heavy loads and what a front-end loader could lift
and a double flatbed logging truck could haul.
During the course of my thirty years of investigations into the
mysteries of ancient civilizations, I have often been puzzled by the
way people react to cyclopean blocks of stone being moved long
distances or hoisted up into the air. These reactions were either a
blank look or a shrug that said "Okay, what's the big deal?"
response frustrated me and made me feel as if I was not
communicating adequately the scope and difficulty of the problem.
But I have since realized that the reason most people do not grasp
the magnitude of the problem - and what the "real" enigmas of our
planet are - has to do with simple, direct experience.
One hundred and fifty years ago most people lived on farms in rural
areas and were commonly faced with having to haul loads of hay,
logs, or whatever. They knew what it took to bale a ton of hay and
lift a three-hundred-pound log or chunk of rock.
But today machines
handle all of these heavy-lifting and moving jobs and we have lost
our perspective. I recently had a conversation with a friend about
these issues wherein I was trying to explain why the Egyptians could
not have built the Great Pyramid with primitive tools and
He was skeptical. until he recalled an event that quickly shifted
I was telling him that I would be willing to concede
that the builders could handle the millions of 2.5-ton blocks if he
would deal with the problem of the seventy-ton megaliths over the
King's Chamber. The light went on in his head. He suddenly became
animated as he told me how he and a group of friends were faced with
moving a heavy pool table.
They positioned themselves about it.
shoulder to shoulder. and gave the old heave-ho.
It came as a great surprise when the pool table remained rooted to
the floor; they had not been able to lift it even one inch. My point
sank in. You cannot use manpower to lift a seventy-ton block of
granite up and out of a quarry and onto a sledge. The task increases
exponentially when we consider how one-hundred-ton blocks were
hoisted up and positioned more than twenty feet off the ground in
the Sphinx Temple.
This is an engineering and physics problem that
cannot be overcome by numbers. which is how Egyptologists try to
solve it. Granite is very dense. and a twenty-foot-long block can
weigh seventy tons.
How many men can physically fit around it to
attempt a lift? Maybe fifty. which is not even enough manpower to
hoist ten tons.
This is an intractable problem.
As long as Egyptologists insist that
men lifted up the cyclopean blocks of stone with nothing but brute
force and ropes, this problem will need to be overcome. The rest of
the construction formula of the Egyptologists is moot until this
primary obstacle is dealt with. If they cannot or will not prove
that it was accomplished as they claim, then it is time to go beyond
challenging the rest of their baseless theories.
We need to discard
the whole orthodox house of cards and walk away from the so-called
Returning to the 350-ton cyclopean monsters, our highest-rated
commercial cranes are near their limit with this load. If anyone
thinks that men, ropes, and sledges lifted and hauled loads that our
heaviest equipment can barely handle, I will argue that this belief
is a sign of technological illiteracy. Recently I was watching a
documentary about a bridge that collapsed while a train was
traveling over it. I went through a mental process similar to the
copper mine example.
Locomotives, diesel or steam, weigh about two hundred tons. They are
rugged, hardworking, heavy-duty pieces of machinery. There are many
cyclopean blocks in Egypt and Peru that weigh as much as a
locomotive. A monstrous crane was brought in to fish the locomotive
out of the river. Imagine placing a locomotive on bare earth or
sand. What would happen? It would immediately sink into the ground.
There is a good reason that train tracks are built on a gravel bed
that has railroad ties laid down crosswise beneath the steel tracks.
Could several thousand men pull a locomotive across the sand? That
is extremely doubtful. Some kind of hard-packed road would have to
be constructed to take the weight and lessen the tremendous drag. As
we saw above, our modern highways hold up only under loads less than
The average eighteen-wheel tractor-trailer hauls about twenty tons,
so it is obvious that loads exceeding twenty tons are indeed very
heavy. Those kinds of loads were hauled all over Egypt. Where is the
evidence that the necessary roads were installed? They would not
have disappeared, as they would have been made out of stones and
Assuming a few of the ancient stone-block transport roads have been
uncovered, they are perfect to test the orthodox sledge-hauling
theory. The problem of how the ancients moved the heaviest loads is
quite enough to crush the orthodox building theories and time lines
into dust. in my estimation.
Academics are not known for being
mechanically inclined. nor are they the ones doing the sweat labor
during excavations out in the field. It is extraordinarily easy to
put pen to paper and make a one-hundred-ton block of stone move from
the quarry onto a temple wall. It is impossible to meet that
challenge in the real world using manpower unaided by modern
The fact is that the Egyptologist Mark Lehner discovered this years
ago when he put together an expert team to try and raise a
thirty-five-ton obelisk using ancient tools and techniques. It was
filmed by "NOVA."
A master stonemason was brought in to quarry the
granite block from the bedrock. Unfortunately. he gave up after
trying every trick he knew. They called a bulldozer in. which cut it
away from the bedrock and lifted it onto a waiting truck.
really the end of the experiment. and it proved that it was not
possible to quarry and lift a block one-tenth the size of the
heaviest obelisk still standing in Egypt.
WHAT MORE PROOF IS NEEDED?
Lehner never again tried to use the ancient tools to prove how the
pyramids were constructed.
In a later experiment aimed at showing
that a twenty-foot-tall scale model of the Great Pyramid could be
constructed. he brought in barefoot locals with modern chisels.
hammers. and a truck with a steel winch to hoist the blocks out of
That compromised the entire test. which was silly anyway. as the
blocks were less than half the size of the average ones used to
build the pyramid. How could that prove that seventy-ton blocks were
hoisted up 150 vertical feet to the King's Chamber? His use of the
twenty-foot-tall scale model is analogous to the comparison between
the plastic Tonka truck and a real earth-mover cited earlier in this
The whole fiasco proved only that he had become intimidated
by the magnitude of the construction problems.
We encounter very similar. intractable problems when we examine the
precision engineering that went into building the Great Pyramid. We
have another example of just how precise and demanding this massive
project was in a demonstration that took place in the late 1970s. At
that point in time. Japan was the global economic miracle. and
A Japanese team funded by Nissan set out to prove they
had the wherewithal to build a sixty-foot scale model of the Great
Pyramid using traditional tools and methods.
The Egyptian government approved the project. Their first
embarrassment came at the quarry when they discovered they could not
cut the stones from the bedrock. They called in jackhammers. The
next embarrassing situation came when they tried to ferry the blocks
across the river on a primitive barge. They could not control it and
had to call for a modern one.
Then they ran into more grief on the opposite bank when they
discovered that the sledges sank into the sand and they could not
budge them. They called for a bulldozer and a truck. The coup de
grace was delivered when they tried to assemble the pyramid and
found they could not position the stones with any accuracy. and had
to request the aid of helicopters.
National pride and saving face are very important to the Japanese.
and this was a shameful episode. They were utterly humiliated when
they ultimately discovered that they were not able to bring the four
walls together into an apex and their mini-pyramid experiment was a
disaster. They left Giza sadder and
wiser. Imagine the inconceivably exact planning that went into
building the Great Pyramid in order to bring the 481-foot-high walls
to a point!
How long did it take the ancient Egyptians to build it? That is the
wrong question. The right one is. Could the ancient Egyptians have
built the Great Pyramid? The answer is: not with the tools and
techniques that Egyptologists claim they used.
These issues have been raised and debated for decades. It is time to
bring them to a head and move on. Alternative historians have
pointed to the enigmas and orthodoxy has pooh-poohed them. Quite
frankly. this gridlock is unproductive. Orthodox historians have
shown a disdain for applying the rules and guidelines of scientific
methodology to the matter.
Chris Dunn has addressed this issue and pointed out that
Egyptologists apply a double standard when it comes to evaluating
their soft "evidence" versus the hard facts as outlined above. They
set the bar about one foot off the ground for themselves and about
eight feet high for alternative historians.
The repeated live TV and canned video programs that have been
churned out quite regularly since the mid-1990s. by Zahi Hawass and
Mark Lehner. have been aimed at shoring up the party line. In the
Fox-TV special broadcast live from the Giza plateau in September
I watched the robot explore the shaft. While most observers
have focused on analyzing the "payoff." the most important parts of
the program slipped by virtually unnoticed. These were "the filler"
segments that recited and added new support for the traditional
version of history. It was very deftly layered into the program; in
fact. it was "the programming" part of the show.
There really is no "debate" between the orthodox and the alternative
history camps because the former group refuses to engage in any
fair. open exchange or to provide solid proof of its theories. Every
one of their basic construction tenets can be subjected to
scientifically controlled tests. Alternative historians have been
under the false impression that the other side could be convinced
with compelling fact-based arguments and incontrovertible evidence.
But that has proved to be a false assumption.
History's mysteries have long since become a political football.
In my opinion. it is time to leave behind that paradigm and time to
stop playing by the other side's rigged rules. The debate is over.
if it ever existed. so why go on wasting effort trying to open
closed minds? That is an exercise in futility.
Some very crucial
issues need our full attention:
What intelligent culture built the
pyramid complexes using cyclopean stones?
How did they do it and
where is the evidence of the technology that was used?
Are we the
beneficiaries of an alien, yet human, DNA that has to solve this
riddle before it can evolve any further?
Or are we the inheritors of
a strictly Earth-based legacy handed down by a "lost" civilization?
30 - An Engineer in Egypt
Did the Ancient Egyptians Possess Toolmaking Skills Comparable to
Those of the Space Age?
Within the past three years, artifacts established as icons of
ancient Egyptian study have developed a
There are suggestions of controversy, cover-ups, and
conspiracy to squelch or ignore data that promises to shatter
conventional academic thinking regarding prehistoric society. A
powerful movement is intent on restoring to the world a heritage
that has been partly destroyed and undeniably misunderstood. This
movement consists of specialists in various fields who, in the face
of fierce opposition from Egyptologists, are cooperating with each
other to effect changes in our beliefs of prehistory.
The opposition by Egyptologists is like the last gasp of a dying
man. In the face of expert analysis, they are striving to protect
their cozy tenures by arguing engineering subtleties that make no
In a recent interview, an Egyptologist ridiculed
theorists who present different views of the pyramids, claiming
their ideas are the product of overactive imaginations stimulated by
the consumption of beer. Hmmm...
By way of challenging such conventional theories, for decades there
has been an undercurrent of speculation that the pyramid builders
were highly advanced in their technology.
Attempts to build pyramids
using the orthodox methods attributed to the ancient Egyptians have
fallen pitifully short. The Great Pyramid is 483 feet high and
houses seventy-ton pieces of granite lifted to a level of 175 feet.
Theorists have struggled with stones weighing from up to two tons to
a height of a few feet.
One wonders if these were attempts to prove that primitive methods
are capable of building the Egyptian pyramids - or the opposite?
Attempts to execute such conventional theories have not revealed the
theories to be correct! Do we need to revise the theory, or will we
continue to educate our young with erroneous data?
In August 1984 I published an article in Analog magazine entitled
"Advanced Machining in Ancient
Egypt." based on Pyramids and Temple of Gizeh, by Sir William
Flinders Petrie (the world's first Egyptologist). published in 1883.
Since that article's publication. I have been fortunate enough to
visit Egypt twice. On each occasion I left Egypt with more respect
for the industry of the ancient pyramid builders - an industry. by
the way. whose technology does not exist anywhere in the world
In 1986. I visited the Cairo Museum and gave a copy of my article.
and a business card. to its director. He thanked me kindly. then
threw my offering into a drawer with sundry other stuff and turned
away. Another Egyptologist led me to the "tool room" to educate me
in the methods of the ancient masons by showing me a few tool cases
that housed primitive copper implements.
I asked my host about the cutting of granite. as this was the focus
of my article. He explained how a slot was cut in the granite. and
wooden wedges - soaked with water - would then be inserted. The wood
swelled. creating pressure that split the rock.
This still did not
explain how copper implements were able to cut granite. but he was
so enthusiastic with his dissertation.
I chose not to interrupt.
I was musing over a statement made by the Egyptologist Dr. I.E.S.
Edwards in Ancient Egypt.
Edwards said that to cut the granite,
"axes and chisels were made of copper hardened by hammering."
This is like saying,
"To cut this aluminum saucepan, they fashioned
their knives out of butter"!
My host animatedly walked me over to a nearby travel agent.
encouraging me to buy plane tickets to Aswan, "where," he said,
evidence is clear. You must see the quarry marks there and the
Dutifully, I bought the tickets and arrived at
Aswan the next day.
The Aswan quarries were educational.
The obelisk weighs
approximately 440 tons. However. the quarry marks I saw there did
not satisfy me as being the only means by which the pyramid builders
quarried their rock. Located in a channel that runs the length of
the obelisk is a large hole drilled into the bedrock hillside.
measuring approximately twelve inches in diameter and three feet
The hole was drilled at an angle. with the top intruding into
the channel space.
The ancients must have used drills to remove material from the
perimeter of the obelisk. knocked out the webs between the holes.
and then removed the cusps. While strolling around the Giza plateau
later. I started to question the quarry marks at Aswan even more. (I
also questioned why the Egyptologist had deemed it necessary that I
fly to Aswan to look at them.)
I was to the south of the second
pyramid when I found an abundance of quarry marks of a similar
nature. The granite-casing stones. which had sheathed the second
pyramid. were stripped off and lying around the base in various
stages of destruction. Typical to all of the granite stones worked
on were the same quarry marks that I had seen at Aswan earlier in
This discovery confirmed my suspicion of the validity of
Egyptologists' theories on the ancient pyramid builders' quarrying
If these quarry marks distinctively identify the people who
created the pyramids. why would they engage in such a tremendous
amount of extremely difficult work only to destroy their work after
having completed it? It seems to me that these kinds of quarry marks
were from a later period of time and were created by people who were
interested only in obtaining granite. without caring where they got
One can see demonstrations of primitive stonecutting in Egypt if one
goes to Saqqara. Being alerted to the presence of tourists. workers
will start chipping away at limestone blocks.
It doesn't surprise me
that they choose limestone for their demonstration. for it is a
soft. sedimentary rock and can be easily worked. However. one won't
find any workers plowing through granite. an extremely hard igneous
rock made up of feldspar and quartz. Any attempt at creating
granite. diorite. and basalt artifacts on the same scale as the
ancients but using primitive methods would meet with utter and
Those Egyptologists who know that work-hardened copper will not cut
granite have dreamed up a different method. They propose that the
ancients used small round diorite balls (another extremely hard
igneous rock) with which they "bashed" the granite.
How could anyone who has been to Egypt and seen the wonderful
intricately detailed hieroglyphs cut with amazing precision in
granite and diorite statues, which tower fifteen feet above an
average man, propose that this work was done by bashing the granite
with a round ball? The hieroglyphs are amazingly precise, with
grooves that are square and deeper than they are wide.
precise contours and some have grooves that run parallel to each
other, with only a .030-inch-wide wall between the grooves.
Sir William Flinders Petrie remarked that the grooves could have
been cut only with a special tool that was capable of plowing
cleanly through the granite without splintering the rock. Bashing
with small balls never entered Petrie's mind. But, then, Petrie was
a surveyor whose father was an engineer.
Failing to come up with a
method that would satisfy the evidence, Petrie had to leave the
We would be hard-pressed to produce many of these artifacts today,
even using our advanced methods of manufacturing. The tools
displayed as instruments for the creation of these incredible
artifacts are physically incapable of coming even close to
reproducing many of the artifacts in question.
Along with the
enormous task of quarrying, cutting, and erecting the Great Pyramid
and its neighbors, thousands of tons of hard igneous rock, such as
granite and diorite, were carved with extreme proficiency and
accuracy. After standing in awe before these engineering marvels and
then being shown a paltry collection of copper implements in the
tool case at the Cairo Museum, one comes away with a sense of
frustration, futility, and wonder.
Sir William Flinders Petrie recognized that these tools were
insufficient. He admitted it in his book Pyramids and Temples of
Gizeh and expressed amazement and stupefaction regarding the methods
the ancient Egyptians used to cut hard igneous rocks, crediting them
with methods that "we are only now coming to understand." So why do
modern Egyptologists identify this work with a few primitive copper
instruments and small round balls? It makes no sense whatsoever!
While browsing through the Cairo Museum, I found evidence of lathe
turning on a large scale. A sarcophagus lid had distinctive
indications. Its radius terminated with a blend radius at shoulders
on both ends. The tool marks near these corner radii are the same as
those I have witnessed on objects that have an intermittent cut.
Petrie also studied the sawing methods of the pyramid builders. He
concluded that their saws must have been at least nine feet long.
Again, there are subtle indications of modern sawing methods on the
artifacts Petrie was studying. The sarcophagus in the King's Chamber
inside the Great Pyramid has saw marks on the north end that are
identical to saw marks I've seen on modern granite artifacts.
The artifacts representing tubular drilling, studied by Petrie, are
the most clearly astounding and conclusive evidence yet presented to
identify, with little doubt, the knowledge and technology in
existence in prehistory.
The ancient pyramid builders used a
technique for drilling holes that is commonly known as trepanning.
This technique leaves a central core and is an efficient means of
hole making. For holes that didn't go all the way through the
material. the craftsmen would reach a desired depth and then break
the core out of the hole. It was not just the holes that Petrie was
studying. but also the cores cast aside by the masons who had done
Regarding tool marks that left a spiral groove on a
core taken out of a hole drilled into a piece of granite. he wrote.
"[T]he spiral of the cut sinks .100 inch in the circumference of six
inches. or one in sixty. a rate of plowing out of the quartz and
feldspar which is astonishing."
For drilling these holes. there is only one method that satisfies
Without any thought to the time in history when these
artifacts were produced. analysis of the evidence clearly points to
ultrasonic machining. This is the method that I proposed in my
article in 1984. and so far no one has been able to disprove it.
In 1994 I sent a copy of the article to Robert Bauval (author of The
Orion Mystery: Unlocking the Secrets of the Pyramids). who then
passed it on to Graham Hancock (author of Fingerprints of the Gods:
The Evidence of Earth's Lost Civilization ). After a series of
conversations with Hancock. I was invited to Egypt to participate in
a documentary with him. Bauval. and John Anthony West.
22. 1995. at 9:00 A.M.. I had my first experience of being "on
This time. with the expressed intent of inspecting features I had
identified on my previous trip. in 1986. I took some tools with me:
a flat ground piece of steel (commonly known as a parallel in tool
shops. it is about six inches long and a quarter-inch thick with
edges ground flat within .0002 inch); an Interapid indicator; a wire
contour gauge; a device that forms around shapes; and hard-forming
While there. I came across and was able to measure some artifacts
produced by the ancient pyramid builders that prove beyond a shadow
of a doubt that highly advanced and sophisticated tools and methods
had been employed by them. The first object I checked for close
precision was the sarcophagus inside the second (Khafra's) pyramid
on the Giza plateau.
I climbed inside the box. and with a flashlight and the parallel was
astounded to find the surface on the inside of the box perfectly
smooth and perfectly flat. Placing the edge of the parallel against
the surface. I lit my flashlight behind it. There was no light
coming through the interface. No matter where I moved the parallel.
vertically. horizontally. sliding it along as one would a gauge on a
precision surface plate. I couldn't detect any deviation from a
perfectly flat surface.
A group of Spanish tourists found it
extremely interesting too and gathered around me. as I was becoming
quite animated at this point. exclaiming into my tape recorder.
The tour guides were becoming quite animated. too. I sensed that
they probably didn't think it was appropriate for a live foreigner
to be where they believed a dead Egyptian should rest. so I
respectfully removed myself from the sarcophagus and continued my
examination of it from the outside. There were more features of this
artifact that I wanted to inspect. of course. but I didn't have the
freedom to do so.
My mind was racing as I lowered my frame into the narrow confines of
the entrance shaft and climbed outside. As I did so. my mind was
reeling: the inside of a huge granite box finished off to a
precision that we reserve for precision surface plates? How had they
done this? It would be impossible to have done this by hand!
While being extremely impressed with this artifact, I was even more
impressed with other artifacts found at another site in the rock
tunnels at the temple of Serapeum at Saqqara, the site of the step
pyramid and Zoser's tomb. In these dark dusty tunnels are housed
twenty-one huge basalt boxes. They weigh an estimated sixty-five
tons each and are finished off to the same precision as the
sarcophagus in the second pyramid.
The final artifact I inspected was a piece of granite I quite
literally stumbled across while strolling around the Giza plateau
later that day. I concluded, after doing a preliminary check of this
piece, that the ancient pyramid builders had to have used machinery
that followed precise contours in three axes to guide the tool that
created it. Beyond the incredible precision, normal flat surfaces,
being simple geometry, may be explained away by simple methods.
piece, though, drives us beyond the question normally pondered -
What tools were used to cut it? - to a more far-reaching question:
What guided the cutting tool?
These discoveries have more
implications for understanding the technology used by the ancient
pyramid builders than anything heretofore uncovered.
The interpretation of these artifacts depends on engineers and
technologists. When presenting this material to a local engineers
club, I was gratified by the response of my peers. They saw the
significance. They agreed with the conclusions.
While my focus was
on the methods used to produce them, some engineers, ignoring the
Egyptologists' proposed uses for these artifacts, asked,
they doing with them?"
They were utterly astounded by what they saw.
The interpretation and understanding of a civilization's level of
technology cannot and should not hinge on the preservation of a
written record for every technique that it had developed. The nuts
and bolts of our society do not always make good copy, and a stone
mural will more than likely be cut to convey an ideological message
rather than the technique used to inscribe it.
Records of the
technology developed by our modern civilization rest in media that
are vulnerable and could conceivably cease to exist in the event of
a worldwide catastrophe, such as a nuclear war or another ice age.
Consequently, after several thousand years, an interpretation of an
artisan's methods may be more accurate than an interpretation of his
language. The language of science and technology doesn't have the
same freedom as speech. So even though the tools and machines have
not survived the thousands of years since their use, we have to
assume, by objective analysis of the evidence, that they obviously
31 - The Giza Power Plant, Technologies of Ancient Egypt
A New Book Challenges Conventional Wisdom on the Intended Purpose of
the Great Pyramid
In the summer of 1997, Atlantis Rising was contacted by a scientist
involved in government research into nonlethal acoustical weapons.
He said his team had analyzed the Great Pyramid using the most
advanced tools available and concluded that its builders used
sophisticated geometries that we have only recently begun to
understand - "way beyond Euclidean " or any of the other
familiar, ancient systems.
Moreover, we were told, the analysis
indicated that the only way to understand the configuration of the
chambers in the Great Pyramid was in acoustical terms: in other
words, by the sophisticated manipulation of sound. For the weapons
designer, that meant the Great Pyramid was, in all probability, a
weapon - an extremely powerful one at that.
reasons that remain unclear, we soon found ourselves unable to
contact the scientist again, and we were left with a tantalizing bit
of information that we could not corroborate. However, as fate would
have it, one of the most important investigations of the acoustical
potential of the Great Pyramid was being conducted by an old friend
of ours, Christopher Dunn.
Chris has written a book entitled The Giza Power Plant: Technologies
of Ancient Egypt in which he produces an overwhelming body of
evidence that accounts for many previously unexplained anomalies. In
it he tells us that the Giza pyramid was a machine that captured the
acoustic energies of the earth to produce awesome power. In this
article, Chris excerpts and edits a brief summary of the arguments
in his book.
The evidence carved into the granite artifacts in Egypt clearly
points to manufacturing methods that involved the use of machinery
such as lathes. milling machines. ultrasonic drilling machines. and
They also possess attributes that cannot be
produced without a system of measurement that is equal to the system
of measurement we use today. Their accuracy was not produced by
chance. but rather is repeated over and over again.
After I assimilated the data regarding the ancient Egyptians'
manufacturing precision and their possible and in some instances
probable methods of machining. I suspected that to account for the
level of technology the pyramid builders seem to have achieved. they
must have had an equally sophisticated energy system to support it.
One of the pressing questions we raise when we discuss ancient.
ultrasonic drilling of granite is. "What did they use as a source of
A still more forceful inquiry regarding the use of electricity
necessary to power ultrasonic drills or heavy machining equipment
that may have been used to cut granite is.
"Where are their power
Obviously there are no structures from the ancient world
that we can point to and identify as fission reactors or turbine
halls. And why should we have to? Isn't it a bit misguided of us to
form an assumption that the ancient power plants were even remotely
similar to ours?
Nevertheless. there may be some fundamental similarities between
ancient and modern power supplies. in that power plants in existence
today are quite large and need a supply of water for cooling
and steam production.
If such an advanced society existed in
prehistory and if indeed it had an energy system. we could logically
surmise that its power plants. in all probability. would have been
the largest construction projects it would have attempted.
may follow that. as the largest creations of the society. those
power plants would stand a good chance of surviving a catastrophe
and the erosion of the elements during the centuries that followed.
The pyramids easily meet these requirements.
These geometric relics
of the past. which have been studied. speculated about. and on which
so much debate has centered. are located near a water supply. the
Nile River. and. indeed. are the largest building projects that this
ancient society completed. In light of all the evidence that
suggests the existence of a highly advanced society utilizing
electricity in prehistory.
I began to consider seriously the
possibility that the pyramids were the power plants of the ancient
Like just about every other student of the Egyptian pyramids. my
attention was focused on the Great Pyramid. primarily because this
is the one that everybody else's attention had been focused on.
resulting in more research data being available for study. The
reports of each successive researcher's discoveries inside the Great
Pyramid are quite detailed.
It is as though researchers became
obsessed with reporting data. regardless of how insignificant it may
have seemed. Much of their data focuses on the dimensional and
geometric relationship between the Great Pyramid and Earth.
To review John Taylor's findings: A pyramid inch is .001 inch larger
than a British inch. There are twenty-five pyramid inches in a cubit
and there were 365.24 cubits in the square base of the Great
Pyramid. There are 365.24 days in a calendar year. One pyramid inch
is equal in length to 1/500 millionth of Earth's axis The Great
Pyramid and of rotation.
This relationship suggests that Earth in
resonance not only were the builders of the Great Pyramid
knowledgeable about the dimensions of the planet, but they also
based their measurement system on them.
What else is unique about the Great Pyramid? Although it is a
pyramid in shape, its geometry possesses an astounding approximation
of the unique properties of a circle, or sphere. The pyramid's
height is in relationship to the perimeter of its base as the radius
of a circle is in relationship to its circumference. A perfectly
constructed pyramid with an exact angle of 51° 51'14.3" has the
value pi incorporated into its shape.
Further understanding of this relationship requires the study of not
just every detail of the Great Pyramid, but also those of Earth.
Earth is a dynamic, energetic body that has supported civilization's
demand for fuel for centuries. To date, this demand has been
predominantly for energy in the form of fossil fuels. More recently,
scientific advances have allowed us to tap into the power of the
atom, and further research in this area promises greater advances in
There is, however, another form of abundant energy in the earth
that, in its most basic form has, for the most part, been largely
ignored as a potential source of usable energy. It usually gets our
attention when it builds up to a point of destruction. That energy
is seismic, and it is the result of the earth's plates being driven
by the constant agitation of the molten rock within the earth. The
tides are contained not only within the oceans of the world; the
continents, too, are in constant movement, rising and falling as
much as a foot as the Moon orbits Earth.
The earth's energy includes mechanical, thermal, electrical,
magnetic, nuclear, and chemical action, each a source for sound. It
would follow, therefore, that the energy at work in the earth would
generate sound waves that would be related to the particular
vibration of the energy creating it and the material through which
The audible hum of an electric motor - operating at 3,600
rpm - would fall well below the level of human hearing if it were to
slow down to one revolution every twenty-four hours, as in the case
What goes unnoticed as we go about our daily lives is our
planet's inaudible fundamental pulse, or rhythm.
On the other end of the scale, any electrical stimulation within the
earth of piezoelectrical materials - such as quartz - would
generate sound waves above the range of human hearing.
undergoing stress within the earth can emit bursts of ultrasonic
radiation. Materials undergoing plastic deformation emit a signal of
lower amplitude than when the deformation is such as to produce
cracks. Ball lightning has been speculated to be gas ionized by
electricity from quartz-bearing rock, such as granite, that is
subject to stress.
Because the earth constantly generates a broad spectrum of
vibration, we could utilize vibration as a source of energy if we
developed suitable technology. Naturally, any device that attracted
greater amounts of this energy than is normally being radiated from
the earth would greatly improve the efficiency of the equipment.
Because energy will inherently follow the path of least resistance,
any device offering less resistance to this energy than the
surrounding medium through which it passes would have a greater
amount of energy channeled through it.
Keeping all of this in mind and knowing that the Great Pyramid is a
mathematical integer of the earth, it may not be so outlandish to
propose that the pyramid is capable of vibrating at a harmonic
frequency of the earth's fundamental frequency.
In The Giza Power Plant: Technologies of Ancient Egypt, I have
amassed a plethora of facts and deductions based on sober
consideration of the design of the Great Pyramid and nearly every
artifact found within it. When taken together, these all support my
premise that the Great Pyramid was a power plant and the King's
Chamber its power center.
Facilitated by the element that fuels our
Sun (hydrogen), and uniting the energy of the universe with that of
the earth, the ancient Egyptians converted vibrational energy into
microwave energy. For the power plant to function, the designers and
operators had to induce vibration in the Great Pyramid that was in
tune with the harmonic resonant vibrations of Earth.
Once the pyramid was vibrating in tune with Earth's pulse, it became
a coupled oscillator and could sustain the transfer of energy from
the earth with little or no feedback. The three smaller pyramids on
the east side of the Great Pyramid may have been used to assist the
Great Pyramid in achieving resonance, much like today we use smaller
gasoline engines to start large diesel engines.
So let us now turn
the key on this amazing power plant to see how it operated.
THE GIZA POWER PLANT
The Queen's Chamber, located in the center of the pyramid and
directly below the King's Chamber, contains peculiarities entirely
different from those observed in the King's Chamber.
characteristics of the Queen's Chamber indicate that its specific
purpose was to produce fuel, which is of paramount importance for
any power plant. Although it would be difficult to pinpoint exactly
what process took place inside the Queen's Chamber, it appears that
a chemical reaction repeatedly took place there.
The residual substance the process left behind (the salts on the
chamber wall) and what can be deduced from artifacts (grapnel hook
and cedarlike wood) and structural details (Gantenbrink's "door,"
for example) are too prominent to be ignored. They all indicate that
the energy created in the King's Chamber was the result of the
efficient operation of the hydrogen-generating Queen's Chamber.
The equipment that provided the priming pulses was most likely
housed in the subterranean pit. Before or at the time the "key was
turned" to start the priming pulses, a supply of chemicals was
pumped into the northern and southern shafts of the Queen's Chamber,
filling them until contact was made between the grapnel hook and the
electrodes that were sticking out of the door.
Seeping through the
"lefts" in the Queen's Chamber, these chemicals combined to produce
hydrogen gas, which filled the interior passageways and chambers of
the pyramid. The waste from the spent chemicals flowed along the
horizontal passage and down the well shaft.
Induced by priming pulses of vibration - tuned to the resonant
frequency of the entire structure - the vibration of the pyramid
gradually increased in amplitude and oscillated in harmony with the
vibrations of the earth. Harmonically coupled with the earth,
vibrational energy then flowed in abundance from the earth through
the pyramid and influenced a series of tuned, Helmholtz-type
resonators housed in the grand gallery, where the vibration was
converted into airborne sound.
By virtue of the acoustical design of
the grand gallery, the sound was focused through the passage leading
to the King's Chamber. Only
frequencies in harmony with the resonant frequency of the King's
Chamber were allowed to pass through an acoustic filter. which was
housed in the antechamber.
The King's Chamber was the heart of the Giza power plant. an
impressive power center comprising thousands of tons of granite
containing 55 percent silicon-quartz crystal. The chamber was
designed to minimize any damping of vibration. and its dimensions
created a resonant cavity that was in harmony with the incoming
As the granite vibrated in sympathy with the
sound. it stressed the quartz in the rock and stimulated electrons
to flow by what is known as the piezoelectric effect.
The energy that filled the King's Chamber at that point became a
combination of acoustical energy and electromagnetic energy. Both
forms of energy covered a broad spectrum of harmonic frequencies.
from the fundamental infrasonic frequencies of the earth to the
ultrasonic and higher electromagnetic microwave frequencies.
The hydrogen freely absorbed this energy. for the designers of the
Giza power plant had made sure that the frequencies at which the
King's Chamber resonated were harmonics of the frequency at which
hydrogen resonates. As a result. the hydrogen atom. which consists
of one proton and one electron. efficiently absorbed this energy.
and its electron was "pumped" to a higher energy state.
The northern shaft served as a conduit. or a waveguide. and its
original metal lining - which passed with extreme precision through
the pyramid from the outside - served to channel a microwave signal
into the King's Chamber. The microwave signal that flowed through
this waveguide may have been the same signal that we know today is
created by the atomic hydrogen that fills the universe and that is
constantly bombarding Earth.
This microwave signal probably was
reflected off the outside face of the pyramid. then focused down the
Traveling through the King's Chamber and passing through a crystal
box amplifier located in its path. the input signal increased in
power as it interacted with the highly energized hydrogen atoms
inside the resonating box amplifier and chamber.
forced the electrons back to their natural "ground state." In turn.
hydrogen atoms released a packet of energy of the same type and
frequency as the input signal. This "stimulated emission" was
entrained with the input signal and followed the same path.
The process built exponentially - occurring trillions of times over.
What entered the chamber as a low energy signal became a collimated
(parallel) beam of immense power as it was collected in a microwave
receiver housed in the south wall of the King's Chamber and was then
directed through the metal-lined southern shaft to the outside of
This tightly collimated beam was the reason for all the
science. technology. craftsmanship. and untold hours of work that
went into designing. testing. and building the Giza power plant.
The ancient Egyptians had a need for this energy: It was most likely
used for the same reasons we would use it today - to power machines
and appliances. We know from examining Egyptian stone artifacts that
ancient crafts-people must have created them using machinery and
tools that needed electricity to run. However. the means by which
they distributed the energy produced by the Giza power plant may
have been a process very different from today's.
I would like to join the architect James Hagan and other engineers
and technologists in extending my utmost respect to the builders of
the Great Pyramid. Though some academics may not recognize it, the
precision and knowledge that went into its creation are - by modern
standards - undeniable and a marvel to behold.
The evidence presented in The Giza Power Plant, for the most part,
was recorded many years ago by men of integrity who worked in the
fields of archeology and Egyptology.
That much of this evidence was
misunderstood only reveals the pressing need for an
interdisciplinary approach to fields that have, until recently, been
closed to non-academics and others outside the fold of formal
archeology and Egyptology.
Much of our ignorance of ancient cultures can be placed at the feet
of closed-minded theorists who ignore evidence that does not fit
their theories or fall within the province of their expertise.
Sometimes it takes a machinist to recognize machined parts or
As a result, much of the evidence that supports a purpose
for the Great Pyramid as anything other than a tomb has been
ignored, discounted without serious consideration, or simply
explained away as purely coincidental.
The technology that was used inside the Great Pyramid may be quite
simple to understand but difficult to execute, even for our
technologically "advanced" civilization. However, if anyone is
inspired to pursue the theory presented here, his or her vision may
be enhanced by the knowledge that recreating this power source would
be ecologically pleasing to those who have concern about the welfare
of the environment and the future of the human race.
Blending science and music, the ancient Egyptians had tuned their
power plant to a natural harmonic of the earth's vibration
(predominantly a function of the tidal energy induced by the
gravitational effect that the Moon has on Earth). Resonating to the
life force of Mother Earth, the Great Pyramid of Giza quickened and
focused her pulse, and transduced it into clean, plentiful energy.
We know very little about the pyramid builders and the period of
time wherein they erected these giant monuments, yet it seems
obvious that the entire civilization underwent a drastic change, one
so great that its technology was destroyed, with no hope of its
being rebuilt. Hence a cloud of mystery has denied us a clear view
of the nature of these people and their technological knowledge.
Considering the theory presented in The Giza Power Plant, I am
compelled to envision a fantastic society that developed a power
system thousands of years ago that we can barely imagine today.
society takes shape as we ask the logical questions:
"How was the
energy transmitted? How was it used?"
These questions cannot be
fully answered by examining the artifacts left behind.
these artifacts can stimulate our imaginations further; then we are
left to speculate on the causes for the demise of the great and
intelligent civilization that built the Giza power plant.
32 - Return to the Giza Power Plant
Technologist Chris Dunn Finds New Fuel for His Thesis
The Giza Power Plant: Technologies of Ancient Egypt was published in
August 1998, and an article
summarizing its theory appeared the same year in Atlantis Rising.
Since then I have been overwhelmed by the response to the theory.
The reviews have been nothing short of incredible! I have received
letters and e-mails from all over the world supporting the argument
that high levels of technology existed in prehistory and that the
Great Pyramid represents the pinnacle of that technology.
Though the power plant theory may explain every characteristic and
noted phenomenon found within the Great Pyramid, without actually
replicating its function (which is way beyond my own personal
resources), the theory could be ignored or dismissed as being too
fantastic by those who feel more secure with conventional views of
prehistory. Not so with the hard evidence of machining!
There is a section in the book that is increasingly being seen as
the "smoking gun" that proves, beyond a doubt, that the pyramid
builders used advanced technology. It is not a simple matter to
dismiss the physical constraints imposed on those who would attempt
to replicate accurately the granite artifacts found in abundance all
over this ancient land.
Those who try to dismiss it do so from
inexperience and do not understand the subtleties of the work, or
they cling desperately to the belief that Western civilization is
the first civilization to develop science and to translate that
science into products that require advanced methods of
My article, Advanced Machining in Ancient Egypt (later expanded to
become my book The Giza Power Plant), has been under public scrutiny
for around fifteen years. With the level of support that it has
received from those who, today, would be charged with performing the
same kind of work performed by the ancient Egyptians, along with
additional proof, it is rising from the rank of theory to fact.
Since its original publication, in 1984, this tentative,
controversial thorn in the side of Egyptologists has been reinforced
time and time again by my own on-site inspections and by others who
have had the opportunity to see these incredible artifacts for
themselves. The weight of evidence and the educated opinions of
those who understand are creating a consensus that is overturning
our understanding of prehistory.
The most awesome implication may be that civilizations are mortal!
Civilizations such as ours can rise to great heights only to be
dashed by natural or engineered effects. In a blink of an eye, we
can lose it all! Whether as one or as multiple blinks of an eye, our
distant ancestors in prehistoric Egypt received a mortal blow to the
industry capable of creating the artifacts we see there today.
Whether that blow came from extraterrestrial forces, a comet,
geophysical disturbances, or even a nuclear war is open to
speculation. The fact remains that their industries did exist and
somehow became extinct!
The purpose here is not to belabor the obvious or to restate what
others have stated more eloquently (I know I'm "preaching to the
choir" for the most part), but rather to provide an update on what
has happened since the book was published. On a recent trip to
Egypt, as a participant in the conference Egypt in the New
Millennium. I was able to perform additional on-site inspection of
some of the artifacts I described in my articles and book.
I was also blessed to discover startling evidence that supports and
confirms a unique and important aspect of the Giza power plant
theory. This was evidence that made chills run down my spine. for it
came about in a rather unexpected manner. This evidence was inside
the Great Pyramid in the grand gallery. and I am still amazed by
what I found. I will elaborate on this later.
It is with great appreciation for the organizers. attendees. and
speakers at this conference that this article is written. Their
spirit. diversity. and camaraderie buoyed my spirit and gave me
But more than that. through their support and patronage
(which was sometimes accompanied with frustrating and arduous
conditions. with our blessed guide Hakim almost being thrown in
jail). further evidence to support the power plant theory has now
been captured on video and becomes part of the historical record.
A large part of my presentation at Gouda Fayed's conference center
in Nazlet El Samman was to be an on-site inspection and
demonstration of the precision of several artifacts. Gouda's place
overlooked the Sphinx. with the Giza plateau and the pyramid complex
forming an awe-inspiring backdrop.
Though I can say with great confidence that I have proved that the
ancient pyramid builders used advanced methods for machining
granite. the full scope of the work has not yet been determined or
documented. For my trip to Egypt in 1995.
I had taken some
instruments with me to inspect the flatness of artifacts that. just
by simple observation. appeared extremely precise.
Mere looking. however. is not a sufficient means to determine the
true characteristics of the artifacts.
I needed some kind of known
reference with which I could compare the precision. I also needed
something simple and transportable. The precision-ground
straightedge I used in 1995 allowed me to determine a higher order
of precision in many different artifacts than what has been
described in any previous literature.
This year. in my backpack. I carried a precision-ground twelve-inch-long
parallel. or straightedge. precise to within .0001 inch. I also had
a precision toolmaker's solid square. I knew exactly the artifacts I
wanted to use it on - the inside corners of the granite boxes at the
temple of the Serapeum at Saqqara and inside the pyramids.
my tool kit was a set of precision Starrett radius gauges for
inspecting the machined radius that makes the transition from one
surface or contour of an artifact to another.
These instruments are
critical to our understanding of the basic attributes of the
Unfortunately. I was unable to access the rock tunnel at the temple
of the Serapeum. where more than twenty huge black granite and
basalt boxes weighing over seventy tons reside.
We pleaded with the
officials at the site. and I even discussed it with a local
businessman who claimed to have considerable power and influence in
such matters. Nevertheless. I was told that the Serapeum was closed
because it was a danger to the public.
"What kind of danger?" I
asked, and was told in reply that dripping water threatened to
collapse the roof.
I chose not to ask the obvious question about
where the water came from in such an arid country. There was enough
other work to do.
Following my morning presentation on the advanced machining methods
of the ancient Egyptians. the entire conference group and the film
crew proceeded to the Giza plateau and into the bedrock chamber of
the second largest pyramid on the plateau: Khafre's pyramid. In this
chamber in 1995 I had discovered the perfect flatness on the inside
surfaces of the black granite box (commonly and mistakenly. in my
opinion. known as the sarcophagus).
At that time I had uttered the
words "Space-age precision!" to a group of Spanish tourists who were
looking on as I beamed my flashlight behind the precise edge of a
steel parallel and revealed the stunning precision of the surface.
Although I confidently wrote articles citing this as additional
proof of the level of technology practiced by the pyramid builders.
in the back of my mind was the nagging need to go back to Egypt with
additional instruments and do more tests. Each time I go to Egypt I
approach these relics with eager anticipation and some trepidation.
Will I find them the same? Will the next range of instruments
confirm or deny what was gleaned on the previous visit?
The cool confines of the passageway leading to the bedrock chamber
of Khafre's pyramid were a welcome relief from the burning Egyptian
sun. It felt familiar and right to be there. I was excited to share
the discovery I had made four years earlier with the wonderful
people who attended the conference. as well as being able to
document the event on video. But still there was that twinge of
Had I made a mistake in the past? Would the new instruments
reveal anything significant?
Climbing into the black granite box set into the floor of the
chamber. I placed my twelve-inch straightedge on the inside surface.
The "edge" used this time had been prepared differently from the one
I had used in 1995, as it had a chamfer on both corners. For those
interested, I slid this edge along the smooth interior of the
granite box with my flashlight shining behind it and demonstrated
its exact precision.
But I was anxious to perform other tests. The squareness of the corners was of critical importance to me. Modern
machine axes are aligned orthogonally, or exactly perpendicular, to
each other to ensure accuracy. This state ensures that the corners
cut into an object on the machine are square and true.
The requirements for producing this condition go beyond coincidental
simplicity. I wasn't expecting the corners of the sarcophagus to be
perfectly square, for perfection is extremely difficult to achieve.
I was flabbergasted as I slid my precision square along the top of
the parallel (I used the top of the parallel to raise the square
above the corner radius), and it fit perfectly on the adjacent
"Bloody hell!" I exclaimed as the significance of this find came
over me. I pointed it out to others in the group. (Alan Alford would
spend the next few days mimicking me with a good-natured "Bloody
The film crew was busy capturing my exploration on video as
I went to each corner and found the same condition. On three
corners, the square sat flush against both surfaces. One corner had
a gap that was detected by the light test, though it was probably
only about .001 inch.
So not only did we have an artifact with perfectly flat surfaces,
but the inside corners were also perfectly square. What else was
significant about this so-called sarcophagus? The corners
themselves! After conducting the test with the parallel and the
square, I pulled out my radius gauges to check the corner radius. As
I checked the corner, I chuckled to myself with memories of a
documentary I had seen earlier that year.
Those of you who saw the Fox special in September 2002 will remember
the moment in it when the world's foremost Egyptologist and the
director of the Giza plateau, Zahi Hawass, picked up a dolerite ball
in the bedrock chamber under one of the satellite pyramids next to
He was describing. to the Fox anchor Suzie
Koppel. the Egyptologists' theory of the methods the ancient
Egyptians used to create granite artifacts. This method involved
bashing the granite with a round ball until the desired shape was
I'm not disputing that this is a viable means of creating a box and.
indeed. there is evidence at Memphis near Saqqara that some boxes
were created in this manner.
These boxes had large corner radii.
which were extremely rough and tapered toward the bottom - exactly
what one would expect to produce using a stone ball. However. as Hawass was wielding his eight-inch-diameter ball in front of the
cameras. my attention was focused on the shiny. black. so-called
sarcophagus behind him. which sat in mute contradiction to his
The inside of this box had the same appearance as the box inside
Khafre's pyramid. The surfaces appeared smooth and precise but. more
important. the inside corners were equally as sharp as what I had
witnessed in Khafre's pyramid. Just looking at it. one could see
that to create such an artifact with an eight-inch-diameter ball
would be impossible!
Likewise. creating the corner radius of the box inside Khafre's
pyramid using such primitive methods would be impossible. Checking
this corner radius with my radius gauges. I started with a half-inch
radius gauge and kept working my way down in size until the correct
one had inadvertently been selected. The inside corner radius of the
box inside Khafre's pyramid checked 3/32 inch.
The radius at the
bottom. where the floor of the box met the wall. checked 7/16 inch.
It should go without saying that one cannot fit an eight-inch ball
into a corner with a 3/32 radius. or even a one-inch radius.
THE GIZA POWER PLANT: THE PROOF
I don't think I have ever been as surprised as I was while filming
inside the grand gallery.
Filming inside the grand gallery had been
especially rewarding. as I had had my doubts as to whether I would
even get to go into the Great Pyramid. It had been closed to
visitors. ostensibly for restoration. and we had spent almost a week
of uncertainty over access. But after numerous calls and visits to
officials. we finally got the go-ahead.
While most of the group meditated in the King's Chamber. the video
crew and I went out into the grand gallery to do some filming. I was
going to describe. on camera. my theory about the function of the
This involved pointing out the slots in the gallery
side ramps. the corbeled walls. and the ratchet-style ceiling.
Equipped with a microphone. I stood just below the great step. the
camera at the top. While the soundman adjusted his gear. I scanned
the wall with my flashlight. It was then I noticed that the first
corbeled ledge had some scorch marks underneath it. and that some of
the stone was broken away.
Then. as the camera lights came on.
things became really interesting.
In all the literature I had read. the grand gallery was described as
being constructed of limestone. But here I was looking at granite! I
noted a transition point farther down the gallery where the rock
changed from limestone to granite. I scanned the ceiling and saw.
instead of the rough. crumbling limestone one sees when first
entering the gallery. what appeared to be. from twenty-eight feet
below. smooth. highly polished granite.
This was of great
significance to me. It made sense that the material closer to the
power center would be constructed of a material that was more
resistant to heat!
I then paid closer attention to the scorch marks on the walls. There
was heavy heat damage underneath each of the corbeled layers. for a
distance of about twelve inches. and it seemed as though the damage
was concentrated in the center of the burn marks.
Then. visually. I
took a straight line through the center of each scorch mark and
projected it down toward the gallery ramp. That was when chills ran
down my spine and the hair stood out on my neck. The line extended
in alignment with the slot in the ramp!
In The Giza Power Plant, I had theorized that harmonic resonators
were housed in these slots and were oriented vertically toward the
ceiling. I had also theorized that there was a hydrogen explosion
inside the King's Chamber that had shut down the power plant's
operation. This explosion explained many other unusual effects that
have been noted inside the Great Pyramid in the past. and I had
surmised that the explosion had also destroyed the resonators inside
the grand gallery in a terrible fire.
Only with the powerful lights of the video camera did the evidence
become clear. and illuminated before me. as at no other time before
- the charred evidence to support my theory. This was evidence that
I had not even been looking for!
Even as I conclude this article. I continue to receive confirmation
that I'm on the right track. Others are stepping forward with their
own research along the same lines. A more complete update on all of
this. though. will have to wait for another time.
Perhaps when the
Egyptian government discloses what it finds behind Gantenbrink's
door? I am most anxious to know what is discovered behind this
so-called door. If my own prediction is correct. then yet another
aspect of the power plant theory will be confirmed.
It has been an interesting year.
33 - Petrie on Trial
Have Arguments for Advanced Ancient Machining Made by the Great
Nineteenth-Century Egyptologist Sir William Flinders Petrie Been
Disproved? Christopher Dunn Takes On the Debunkers
If there is one area of research into ancient civilizations that
proves the technological prowess of a
superior prehistoric society, the study of the technical
requirements necessary to produce many granite artifacts found in
Egypt is it.
My own research into how many of these artifacts were produced
started in 1977, and my article Advanced Machining in Ancient Egypt
was first published in Analog magazine in 1984. It was later
expanded to fill two chapters in my book The Giza Power Plant:
Technologies of Ancient Egypt.
As this body of work became more popular and well known, it was only
a matter of time before the orthodox camp attempted to diminish the
significance of the artifacts and thereby discredit my work.
Albeit ineffectual, this they have done in both subtle and obvious
Documentaries have been produced that attempt to reinforce
Egyptologists' views that bashing granite with hard stone balls
produced fabulous granite artifacts.
A stonemason named Denys Stocks was taken to Egypt to demonstrate
how the use of copper and sand, along with a tremendous amount of
manual effort, can produce holes and slots in granite. This he
succeeded in doing, much to the satisfaction of orthodox believers.
Two authors who claimed to be onetime supporters of alternate
ideas such as mine switched camps and wrote a book entitled Giza:
The Truth. Though unschooled in the mechanical arts, Ian Lawton and
Chris Ogilvie-Herald were determined to take an antagonistic
approach to the ideas I have presented and to support the orthodox
In each of the above cases, the limited perspective and incomplete
analysis of all the evidence, though probably passing muster with
their own peer reviews, do not pass muster with my own peers, who
consist of technologists involved in such work today.
In fact, the
consensus among the latter group is that the former are dead wrong.
However, none of us is perfect, and everyone has his Achilles' heel.
In retrospect, I will admit to having probably taken my analysis too
far when I proposed that ultrasonic machining produced the artifact
known as Core #7. My theory of ultrasonic machining was based on Sir
William Flinders Petrie's book Pyramids and Temples of Gizeh. In
this book, Petrie described an artifact with marks of a drilling
process that left a spiral groove in granite indicating that the
drill sank into the granite at .100 inch per revolution of the
My conviction was shaken when I read, in Giza: The Truth, that two
researchers, John Reid and Harry Brownlee, had effectively dismissed
my theories of how the ancient Egyptians had drilled granite.
a physical examination of this artifact, they testified that the
grooves were not spiral grooves but individual rings, and were
common to cores found in any modern quarry in England.
of this core in Giza: The Truth was positioned in a way that seemed
to support their contention; however, I was unable to disprove them
because I had not even been in the same room as the core, let alone
physically examined it.
Until I had the opportunity to perform a detailed inspection of the
piece. which requires more than mere visual scrutiny.
I was forced
to defer to the observations of Reid and Brownlee. Nevertheless.
even in so doing. if they were basing their observations on the
photograph in Giza: The Truth, I had questions about those
What we have is a photograph that shows the frustrum
of a cone (Core #7) with grooves cut into it. After reading this
report. I immediately posted. to my Web site. a statement to the
effect that I suspended any assertions I have made about ultrasonic
machining of these holes and cores and I also asserted that I was
prepared to examine the core for myself.
On November 10. 1999. I flew out of Indianapolis heading for
England. My Webmaster. Nick Annies. had arranged. with the Petrie
Museum. for the inspection of the core while the museum was closed
for academic research. Nick and I took the train to King's Cross on
Monday. November 15. 1999.
A short walk to the University College.
London. found us. at 10:30 A.M.. standing on the bottom step of the
Petrie Museum. looking up at a gregarious doorman who advised us to
have a cup of tea while we waited for the museum to open and then
pointed us in the direction of a cafeteria. Not only a cuppa did we
find there. but a wonderful English breakfast as well!
Then it came time to inspect the infamous Core #7. Although I had
talked and written about this core for more than fifteen years. this
was not the reverent visit to a holy relic that one might expect. I
was not especially breathless with excitement to take the artifact
into my latex-gloved hands. Nor was I impressed with its size or
To tell the truth. I was profoundly unmoved and
disappointed. With the old Peggy Lee song "Is That All There Is?"
bouncing around in my head. I peered at this insignificant-looking
piece of rock that had fueled such a heated debate on the Internet
and in living rooms and pubs across the globe.
I was thinking to myself as I looked at the rough grooves on its
surface, "How do I make sense of this?" And, "What was Petrie
thinking about?" I looked up at Nick Annies standing over me. He had
a look on his face that reminded me of my mother, within whose face
I sought comfort when, at the age of eight, I was lying on the
operating table having a wart burned out of my palm by a long, hot
Not a word passed between us as I formulated my ultimate confession
to the world. I had made a huge mistake in trusting Petrie's
writings! The core appeared to be exactly as Reid and Brownlee had
The grooves did not appear to have any remote
resemblance to what Petrie had described. With the truth resting
where a wart once grew, I was frozen in time.
With resignation I proceeded to check the width between the grooves
using a 50X handheld microscope with .001 gradated reticle to .100
inch. At this point, I was certain that Petrie had been totally
wrong in his evaluation of the piece.
The distance between the
grooves, which are scoured into the core along the entire length,
was .040-.080 inch. I was devastated that Petrie had even gotten the
distance between the grooves wrong!
Any further measurements, I
thought, would just be perfunctory. I couldn't support any theory of
advanced machining if Petrie's dimensions of .100 inch feed-rate
could not be verified! Nevertheless, I continued with my
The crystalline structure of the core under microscope was beyond my
ability to evaluate.
I could not determine, as surely as Petrie had,
that the groove ran deeper through the quartz than through the
feldspar. I did notice that there were some regions, very few, where
the biotite (black mica) appeared to be ripped from the feldspar in a
way that is similar to other artifacts found in Egypt.
groove passed through other areas quite cleanly without any such
ripping effect, though again I support Brownlee's assertions that a
cutting force against the material could rip the crystals from the
I then measured the depth of the groove. To accomplish this I used
an indicator depth gauge with a fine point to enable it to reach
into a narrow space. The gauge operated so as to allow a zero
setting when the gauge was set on a flat surface without any
deviations. When the gauge passed over a depression (or groove) in a
surface, the spring-loaded indicator point pushed into the groove,
causing the needle to move on the gauge dial, indicating the precise
The depths of the grooves were .002 and .005 inch. (Actually,
because there were clearly discontinuities in the groove at some
locations around the core, the actual measurement would be between
.000 and .005 inch.)
Then came the great question. Was the groove a helix or a horizontal
ring around the core? I had deferred to Reid and Brownlee's
assertions that they were horizontal and I was, at this juncture,
painfully assured that it was the correct thing to do. It was
Petrie's description of the helical groove that made Core #7 stand
apart from modern cores. It was one of the principal characteristics
upon which I had based my theory of ultrasonic machining.
But what I
held in my hand seemed to support Reid and Brownlee's objections to
this theory, for they said that the core had an appearance similar
to any other core one may produce in a quarry.
White cotton thread was the perfect tool to use when inspecting for
a helical groove. Why not use a thread to check a thread! I
carefully placed one end of the thread in a groove while Nick
secured it with a piece of Scotch tape. While I peered through my
10X Optivisor, I rotated the core in my left hand, making sure the
thread stayed in the groove with my right.
The groove varied in
depth as it circled the core, and at some points there was just a
faint scratch that I would probably not have detected with my naked
eye. As the other end of the thread came into view, I could see that
what Petrie had described about this core was not quite correct.
Petrie had described a single helical groove that had a pitch of
.100 inch. What I was looking at was not a single helical groove,
but two helical grooves.
The thread wound around the core following
the groove until it lay approximately .110 inch above the start of
the thread. Amazingly, though, there was another groove that nestled
neatly in between!
I repeated the test at six or seven different locations on the core,
with the same results. The grooves were cut clockwise, looking down
the small end to the large - which would be from top to bottom. In
uniformity, the grooves were as deep at the top of the core as they
were at the bottom. They were also as uniform in pitch at the top
and bottom, with sections of the groove clearly seen right to the
point where the core granite was broken out of the hole.
These are not horizontal striations or rings as trumpeted in Giza:
The Truth, but rather helical grooves that spiraled down the core
like a double-start thread.
To replicate this core, therefore, the drilling method should
produce the following:
A clockwise double helical groove from top to bottom with a .110
to .120-inch pitch.
A groove between .000 and .005 inch deep.
A taper from top to bottom. Some ripping of the quartz is
I was quite impressed with the deepness of the groove, so after
returning home I walked out to the tool room and talked to toolmaker
Don Reynolds, who was working on a surface grinder. I asked him if
he had a sharp diamond wheel dresser. (These are used to dress
carborundum and other types of grinding
He did in fact have one; it had been barely used. and had a
nice sharp point. (These industrial diamonds are set into a steel
shank. which is then fixtured so as to sit on a magnetic chuck.) I
asked him how deep a groove he thought he could scratch into a piece
of granite with the diamond.
"Let's find out!"
We walked over to a granite surface plate while I jokingly
admonished him not to try it on the work surface. He pressed the
diamond point into the side of the plate. Bearing down with all the
weight he could throw behind it. he scoured the side of the plate
with a scratch about four inches long.
We both felt the scratch.
"How deep would you say that is?" I asked.
"Oh. between .003 and .005 inch." he said.
"Let's check it out then!" I said.
Don fixtured an indicator gauge in a surface gauge and zeroed the
fine needle point on the surface. As he passed it over the groove.
the point dropped into the groove and the dial read only .001 inch!
The reason I bring this up is that it has been suggested that if the
core did have a spiral groove. it would have been created by the
lateral pressure of a spinning drill as it was being rapidly
withdrawn from the hole.
Bringing all my thirty-eight years of
experience to bear. for the following reasons I cannot imagine that
this is remotely possible:
This idea relies on centrifugal force to cut the groove. as the
drill is being withdrawn and passing over a widening gap. and to
achieve greater centrifugal force. the drill would need to spin
There wouldn't be sufficient lateral force to cut a groove in
granite to a depth of .001 inch. let alone .005 inch. It is as
simple as that.
With a spinning drill shank that has the freedom to roam inside
an oversized bearing. the drill will seek the path of least
resistance. which is away from the granite.
Petrie's observations were valid when he claimed that this was
not a viable means of creating the groove. because of a buildup of
dust between the tube and the granite.
Why such a commotion regarding a small. insignificant core?
it was seen as the weakest area of my work. and therefore easily
disputed. It also served to obscure and divert attention from other.
more significant artifacts that I have described.
Thus, I would
challenge the orthodox camp to forget about Petrie's Core #7 for now
and provide explanations for all of the other artifacts I describe
in my book. I would challenge them to demonstrate. with the tools
they have educated us with for centuries. how the
ancient Egyptians created such awesome precision and geometry in
hard granite, diorite, basalt, and schist.
For these, my friends, are the products of a highly advanced
34 - How Did the Pyramid Builders Spell Relief?
Do We Really Know Why the Ancients Used Such Giant Stones in the
Pyramid's So-Called Relieving Chambers?
While conducting explorations in the Great Pyramid in 1836. the
British military man Colonel William
Richard Howard-Vyse was in a crouched space above the King's Chamber
examining a mysterious layer of granite beams that were similar to
the granite beams that formed the ceiling of the King's Chamber
The crouched space is named Davison's Chamber. after
Nathaniel Davison. who had discovered it in 1765.
Howard-Vyse. who reportedly had received £10.000 from his family for
this exploration and. more important. to liberate themselves from
his presence. was intent on making a significant discovery and thus
far was not having any luck. The granite layer over his head posed a
tantalizing clue that something might be lying behind it. Noticing a
crack between the beams of the ceiling.
Howard-Vyse mulled over the
possibility of yet another chamber existing above. Being able to
push a three-foot-long reed into the crack. without obstruction.
seemed an indication that there must be some other space beyond.
Howard-Vyse and his helpers made an attempt to cut through the
granite to find out if there was another chamber above. Discovering
in short order that their hammers and hardened steel chisels were no
match for the red granite. they resorted to gunpowder. A local
worker. his senses dulled by a supply of alcohol and hashish. set
the charges and blasted away the rock until another chamber was
Similar to Davison's Chamber. a ceiling of monolithic granite beams
spanned the newly discovered chamber. indicating to Howard-Vyse the
possible existence of yet another chamber above. After blasting
upward for three and a half months and to a height of forty feet.
they discovered three more chambers. making a total of five.
The topmost chamber had a gabled ceiling made of giant limestone
blocks. To construct these five chambers. the ancient Egyptians had
found it necessary to use forty-three pieces of granite weighing up
to seventy tons each. The red-granite beams were cut square and
parallel on three sides. but were left seemingly untouched on the
top surface. which was rough and uneven.
Some of them even had holes
gouged into their topsides.
In this article we will look at the evidence and attempt to explore
reasons for this phenomenal expenditure of resources from both the
conventional perspective and the alternative perspective.
Considering the enormous effort that must have gone into delivering
to the Giza plateau these enormous monoliths. we will ask.
the framework of the established hypothesis on the Great Pyramid.
was all of this work really necessary?"
By today's standards. quarrying and hauling five hundred miles for
just one of the forty-three granite beams that are placed above the
King's Chamber would not be a simple task.
Yet the ancient Egyptians
accomplished this task not just once. but many times. The seveny-ton
weight. however. is not the limit of what the ancient Egyptians were
capable of. Large obelisks of up to four hundred tons were also
quarried. hauled. and erected. Howard-Vyse surmised that the reason
for the five superimposed chambers was to relieve the flat ceiling
of the King's Chamber from the weight of thousands of tons of
Although most researchers after Howard-Vyse have generally accepted
this speculation. there are others. including the world's first
Egyptologist. Sir William Flinders Petrie. who have not. Important
considerations cast doubt on this theory and prove it to be
What needs to be considered is that there is a more efficient and
less complicated technique in chamber construction elsewhere inside
the Great Pyramid.
The Queen's Chamber negates the argument that the
King's Chamber's overlying "chambers of construction" were designed
to allow a flat ceiling. The load of masonry bearing down on the
Queen's Chamber is greater than that above the King's Chamber. due
to the fact that this chamber is situated below the King's Chamber.
If a flat ceiling had been needed for the Queen's Chamber. it would
have been quite safe to span this room with the kind of beams that
are above the King's Chamber. The construction of the Queen's
Chamber employed cantilevered limestone blocks that transferred the
weight of the masonry above to the outside of the walls.
similar to the one in the King's Chamber could have been added to
this design and. as with the beams above the King's Chamber. the
beams would be holding up nothing more than their own weight.
When the builders of the Great Pyramid constructed the King's
Chamber. they were obviously aware of a simpler method of creating a
flat ceiling. The design of the King's Chamber complex. therefore.
must have been prompted by other considerations. What were these
considerations? Why are there five superimposed layers of monolithic
seventy-ton granite beams?
Imagine the sheer will and energy that
went in to raising one of the granite blocks 175 feet in the air!
There must have been a far greater purpose for investing so much
time and energy.
I made the above argument in my book, The Giza Power Plant.
its publication, the contrary opinion that I had articulated had
evidently become a point of discussion on a message board because I
received an e-mail from Egyptology student Mikey Brass, within which
was a link to a translation of a German magazine article.
question was posed to Frank Dornenburg, a participant in the
discussion: Why so many layers?
I have been debating elsewhere, the Kings Chamber, and the question
of why five 'Relieving' Chambers were needed to be used to spread
the massive weight above the King's Chamber. My answer to this was I
simply did not know.
A good answer to this question can be found in Gottinger Miszellen 173:
"The old method of corbelling channeled the
weight force directly to the walls of a chamber.
The new, and here
for the first time used, gable-roof redirects the force down AND
sideways. If the Egyptians had put the gable roof in the King's
Chamber directly on the ceiling like in the Queen's Chamber, the
sideways force would have damaged the great gallery. So they had to
put the gable above the upper layer of the gallery's construction.
The easiest way to do this was to stack small chambers. And if you
look at a cross section you will see that now the sideways force of
the roof goes well over the roof of the gallery."
Superficially, what is proposed in the above hypothesis may seem
It is, however, a construct founded on flawed assumptions
and an incomplete analysis of the entire King's Chamber complex.
Before accepting it as factual, we need to consider the following.
The hypothesis assumes that dynamic lateral forces would follow the
direction of the angled blocks and that these lateral forces would
accumulate as more stone was piled on top of the gabled blocks.
According to the hypothesis, the consequence of each block added
above the King's Chamber causes additional lateral thrust to push
against the southern end of the grand gallery.
The drawing on page 253 represents a mechanical setup with which
many manufacturing technologists are intimately familiar. It is a
steel plate resting in a V-block. If we allow that the above
hypothesis is correct. the plate would push on surface A. causing
At rest. the plate will put more pressure on the opposite surface
due to the center of gravity of the piece. Except for gravity. there
are no dynamic forces at work. There is only dead weight. which is
distributed according to each member's center of gravity. When an
object is placed on an inclined plane. it has the potential to move
down that plane by gravitational forces acting upon it.
movement continues until an obstruction is encountered. at which
time the kinetic energy that causes lateral motion ceases.
The gabled ceiling blocks above the King's Chamber are situated on
an inclined plane cut into the core blocks. Assuming that. like the
Queen's Chamber. the center of gravity of these blocks lies outside
the chamber walls. the blocks may be described as cantilevered.
whereas there is no archthrust at the apex where two opposing blocks
The entire weight of the block is borne by the blocks that
form the inclined plane. with some weight being carried by the block
that holds the lower end.
Without knowing for sure what design features were employed. I can
envision a design that would be sound and not damage the grand
gallery. The rough measurement between the ends of the gabled blocks
and the grand gallery south wall is about nine feet. Considering the
width of the gallery (between forty-two and eighty-two inches). it
is reasonable to assume that the blocks that form the gallery south
wall extend outside the inside surface - but to what distance? I
However. considering that the King's Chamber's northern
shaft bends around the grand gallery. it gives rise to the
speculation that the blocks that form the gallery walls are deeper
than four feet. (This is a significant point to make. and probably
in itself worthy of a discussion. The northern shaft could have more
easily been a straight shot to the sky. without the extra bends. It
would have clearly missed the inside wall of the grand gallery by
about four feet.)
With the grand gallery southern-wall blocks butted against the
gallery east- and west-wall blocks. any lateral forces that might
affect it from the King's Chamber's gabled ceiling blocks would give
less cause for concern than. say. the forces acting on the roof of
the horizontal passage from the pressure of the Queen's Chamber's
gabled ceiling blocks - or the pressure of the blocks bearing down
on the roof of the grand gallery.
Moreover. building on top of gabled ceiling blocks does not
necessarily mean that they must bear a tremendous accumulation of
weight. As described in the drawing above. the distribution of load
does not necessarily have to bear down on the gable.
Perhaps the most significant argument against what has been proposed
in Gottinger Miszellen, and the simplest to understand. can be made
by pointing to a plan view of the Great Pyramid. As we can see. the
King's Chamber is thirty-four feet in length. The grand gallery is
forty-two to eighty-two inches wide - barely the width of one
gabled ceiling block.
Therefore. when looking at a side view of the chambers. the
hypothesis may appear plausible. but it falls apart under scrutiny.
for even if we allow that there would be undue pressure on the south
wall of the grand gallery. it would not necessitate five chambers
being built across the entire thirty-fourfoot length of the King's
Also, why five layers of beams? Why not a large open space
with the gabled ceiling above?
In cutting these giant monoliths, the builders evidently found it
necessary to craft the beams destined for the uppermost chamber with
the same respect as those intended for the ceiling directly above
the King's Chamber. Each beam was cut flat and square on three
sides, with the topside seemingly untouched. This is significant,
considering that those directly above the King's Chamber would be
the only ones visible to those entering the pyramid.
Moreover, it is remarkable that the builders would exert the same
amount of effort in finishing the thirty-four beams, which would not
be seen once the pyramid was built, as they did the nine beams
forming the ceiling of the King's Chamber, which would be seen. Even
if these beams were imperative to the strength of the complex,
deviations in accuracy would surely be allowed, making the cutting
of the blocks less time-consuming - unless, of course, they were
either using these upper beams for a specific purpose, and/or were
using standardized machinery methods that produced these beams with
little variation in their shape.
Why five layers of these beams? To include so many monolithic blocks
of granite when constructing the King's Chamber is obviously
To get an idea of the enormity of such a task today, my
company, Danville Metal Stamping, recently acquired a hydroform
press. The main body of the press weighs one hundred tons and had to
be shipped more than one hundred miles to our plant. Because of
weight distribution considerations, the Department of Transportation
dictated that it be hauled on a special tractor-trailer with the
weight distributed among nineteen axles.
The length of this trailer
approached two hundred feet and it required two additional drivers,
positioned at key points along its length, to pivot it around
The reason for describing this scenario is to point out that even
using today's efficient, high-tech methods, there would have to be a
damn good reason to move even one heavy load. The forty-three giant
beams above the King's Chamber were not included in the structure to
relieve the King's Chamber from excessive pressure from above, but
rather to fulfill a more advanced purpose.
Without a conventional
explanation that makes sense, we must look for other answers to the
mystery of these granite beams. When these granite beams are
analyzed with a more utilitarian perspective, one can discern a
simple yet refined technology operating at the heart of the Great
Pyramid that makes more sense.
The ancient Egyptians, or Khemitians,
were brilliant in applying natural laws and using natural materials
to enable this ancient power plant to function.
The granite beams
above the King's Chamber were an essential and integral part of
making this pyramid machine hum.
35 - Precision
Did the Ancients Have It? And If They Did, Should It Matter to Us?
The word precision comes from precise, which Webster's defines as
"sharply or exactly limited or
defined as to meaning; exact; definite, not loose, vague, or
equivocal; exact in conduct; strict; formal; nice; punctilious."
Preciseness is "exactness; rigid nicety; excessive regard to forms
or rules; rigid formality." Precision is "the state of being precise
as to meaning; preciseness; exactness; accuracy."
To many people, the application of precision in their lives is
related to their words and actions. We have precise speech, precise
timekeeping, and the precision of a military drill. We may have the
good fortune to be invited to a dinner party by a "precision" and
find the tableware in exact order, with nary a spoon or a goblet out
The application of precision, as noted above, is part and parcel of
being civilized. It is the discipline and order that is necessary
for civilization to function successfully.
Beginning in the late 1800s, a different application of precision
was gaining increased importance and seen to be necessary to ensure
the successful outcome of human endeavors. The machines that were
invented and used as laborsaving devices depended on precision
components to function properly. In the 1800s, the cotton industry
and steam power spawned the Industrial Revolution in the north of
The demand for more-efficient spinning mills and looms gave
rise to a greater emphasis on producing components that functioned
To make products that were consistent, variables in the
manufacturing process had to be reduced or eliminated. To accomplish
this, dimensional variables that were inherent in the manufacture of
critical components needed to be reduced to acceptable levels.
However, because of the inaccuracies of the machine tools of the
day, skilled fitters were needed to scrape, chisel, and file
components to close dimensions in order for them to fit properly.
Wars have accelerated the evolution of standardized measurements and
the elimination of variables in the manufacturing process. Put
yourself in the place of a soldier during the Civil War. His rifle
was precision-crafted, but when replacing a component in the field,
he had to hand-file the pieces to fit. Obviously, this was
time-consuming, and in war, timing could make you a winner or a
loser. Standards were necessarily instituted and suppliers had to
meet these standards or lose business.
Anyone who has brought home a bicycle or piece of
"ready-to-assemble" furniture can appreciate the precision that is
required for these objects to go together easily. Have you ever
found yourself trying to a bolt in a predrilled hole that is off by
an eighth of an inch? This is an example of the need for precision,
and how the effort to produce precision products is actually an
expensive, difficult endeavor.
In manufacturing today, components are made throughout the world and
come together in an assembly plant. The exacting standards and
precision of the product shipped from thousands of miles away ensure
that when they go to the assembly line, the components fit together
without additional work.
Most people will never actually create objects to a high precision.
It is understandable. therefore. that most people overlook this
important aspect of a civilization's infrastructure. To laypeople.
precision is an abstract concept. This is not a criticism. If you
have not had precision manufacturing experience. either
professionally or as a hobby. an understanding of the concept of
precision is academic.
We are end users of powerful precision technologies that fuel our
civilization and make our lives easier. Without manufacturing
precision. cars would not run. planes would not fly. and CDs would
not play. The precision we create is born out of necessity. We do
not create it without good reason. because the costs of producing
artifacts today go up exponentially if the demand for accuracy is
An example of close accuracy and precision is the twelve-inch
straightedge that I took to Egypt in 1999 and 2001. The edge was
finished on a precision grinder. Its deviation from a perfect.
straight line was a mere .0001 inch. For the reader who cannot
relate to what that means in real terms. take a hair out of your
head and split it equally along its length into twenty parts. One
part is approximately equal to .0001 inch. (The average hair is
Or. to compare it to our "some-assembly-required"
example above. this straightedge is 1.250 times more precise than
the predrilled hole that was off by an eighth of an inch.
If we were to miraculously uncover an unidentified artifact in the
Sahara Desert that had been buried for thousands of years. how would
we determine its purpose? If the speculation arises that it may have
had some technological purpose. the challenge would be to prove it.
which would require us to reverse-engineer its design to determine
its function. Reverse engineering has been a part of industrial
competitiveness for years.
Engineers would buy a competitor's
product and by studying its design and components would understand
the science and engineering behind its function. This is why the
recovery of a potential or real enemy's weapons of war is important.
If. after a cursory examination of this unidentified prehistoric
artifact. we determine that it may have been a machine that
functions as a tool to create artifacts. how would we know that it
was a precision machine tool? In order to prove the case for our
prehistoric precision machine tool. it would need to be measured for
accuracy. Certain components associated with precision machine tools
are manufactured to a high accuracy.
Flat surfaces necessary for the machine to function properly would
be finished to within .0002 inch. This kind of accuracy separates
primitive tools and those that are the result of need and
development. The discovery of this precision would elevate the
artifact to a higher purpose. If these components were not precise.
the arguments against it being the product of an advanced society
would be strengthened.
The critical evidence. therefore. is the accuracy of the surfaces
being measured. Artisans do not create surfaces with such accuracy
unless the artifact they are creating needs to function to exact
specifications. Unless there is a need. precision isn't even a
When looking for prehistoric machines. though. we tend to look for
artifacts that are made of iron or steel. not granite. primarily
because we use iron and steel to construct our machines. We see
things as we are. not how they are. Nevertheless. the critical proof
that would be demanded to support the conclusion that a steel
artifact was a precision machine is its precision and the product of
This precision can be found in Egypt - crafted into
many artifacts made of stable igneous rock that would survive tens
thousands of years and still retain their precision.
We may not have the iron and steel used to create the artifact. but
we have the products in abundance. Many of these artifacts. I
believe. may have been misidentified and assigned to a time that
doesn't support the hypothesis. that the tools used to create them
may have eroded over a much longer period of time than established
dates would allow.
There is support for such a speculation if we
look at artifacts purely from an engineering perspective. It has
been said that to understand the ancient Egyptian culture. you have
to think like an Egyptian.
To understand its technological
accomplishments. however. you have to think like an engineer.
The granite box inside Khafre's pyramid has the same characteristics
as the boxes inside the Serapeum.
Yet the boxes in the Serapeum were
ascribed to the eighteenth dynasty. more than eleven hundred years
later. when stoneworking was in decline. Considering that this
dating was based on pottery items that were found and not the boxes
themselves. it would be reasonable to speculate that the boxes have
not been dated accurately.
Their characteristics show that their creators used the same tools
and were blessed with the same skill and knowledge as those who
created Khafre's pyramid.
Moreover. the boxes in both locations are
evidence of a much higher purpose than mere burial sarcophagi.
They are finished to a high degree of accuracy; their corners are
perfectly square. and their inside corners are astoundingly sharp.
All of these features are extremely difficult to accomplish. and
none of them is necessary for a mere burial box.
In 1995 I inspected the inside and outside surfaces of two boxes in
the Serapeum with a six-inch precision straightedge that was
accurate to .0002 inch. My report on what I discovered has been
published in my book The Giza Power Plant and published on my Web
The artifacts I have measured in Egypt have the marks of careful and
remarkable manufacturing methods. They are unmistakable and
irrefutable in their precision, but origin or intent will always be
open to speculation. The accompanying photograph was taken inside
the Serapeum on August 27, 2001.
Those taken of me inside one of
these huge boxes show me inspecting the squareness between a
twenty-seven-ton lid and the inside surface of the granite box on
which it sits. The precision square I am using was calibrated to
.00005 inch (that is, 5/100,000 of an inch) using a Jones & Lamson
The underside of the lid and the inside wall of the box are
Finding that the squareness was achieved not just
on one side of the box but on both raises the level of difficulty in
accomplishing this feat.
Think of this as a geometric reality.
In order for the lid to be
perfectly square with the two inside walls, the inside walls would
have to be perfectly parallel. Moreover, the topside of the box
would need to establish a plane that is square to the sides. That
makes finishing the inside exponentially more difficult.
manufacturers of these boxes in the Serapeum not only created inside
surfaces that were flat when measured vertically and horizontally,
but they also made sure that the surfaces they were creating were
square and parallel to each other, with one surface, the top, having
sides that are five feet and ten feet apart from each other.
without such parallelism and squareness of the top surface, the
squareness noted on both sides would not exist.
As an engineer and craftsman who has worked in manufacturing for
more than forty years and who has created precision artifacts in our
modern world, in my opinion this accomplishment in prehistory is
nothing short of amazing. Nobody does this kind of work unless there
is a very high purpose for the artifact. Even the concept of this
kind of precision does not occur to an artisan unless there is no
other means of accomplishing what the artifact is intended to do.
The only other reason that such precision would be created in an
object is that the tools that are used to create it are so precise
that they are incapable of producing anything less than precision.
With either scenario, we are looking at a higher civilization in
prehistory than what is currently accepted. The implications are
This is why I believe that these artifacts that I have measured in
Egypt are the smoking gun that proves, without a shadow of a doubt,
that a higher civilization existed in ancient Egypt than what we
been taught. The evidence is cut into the stone.
The boxes that are off the beaten tourist's path in the rock tunnels
of the Serapeum would be extremely difficult to produce today. Their
smooth. flat surfaces. orthogonal perfection. and incredibly small
inside corner radii that I have inspected with modern precision
straightedges. squares. and radius gauges leave me in awe.
though after contacting four precision granite manufacturers I could
not find one who could replicate their perfection. I would not say
that it would be impossible to make one today - if we had a
good reason to do so.
But what would that reason be? For what purpose would we quarry an
eighty-ton block of granite. hollow its inside. and proceed to craft
it to such a high level of accuracy? Why would we find it necessary
to craft the top surface of this box so that a lid with an equally
flat underside surface would sit square with the inside walls?
There may be arguments against the claims of advanced societies in
prehistory. Some may argue that the lack of machinery refutes such
claims. but a lack of evidence is not evidence. It is fallacious to
deny or ignore what exists by arguing for what does not exist.
we ponder the purpose for creating such precision. we inexorably
move beyond the simple reasons espoused by historians and are forced
to consider that there was a civilization in prehistory that was far
more advanced and vastly different from what was previously thought.
We do not need to look for secret chambers or halls of records to
know that this civilization existed.
It is crafted into some of the
hardiest materials with which they worked - igneous rock.
36 - The Obelisk Quarry Mystery
Do Egyptologists Really Know How These Monuments Were Created?
In my articles and book, I have injected a distinct bias when I have
viewed ancient Egyptian artifacts.
this article I will explain where my bias came from and I will
answer the following questions:
"Isn't it possible to create all
these wonderful artifacts in ancient Egypt with primitive tools?
Because there are volumes of work that describe how these tools were
capable of such work, we don't need to resort to fantastic
inventions that don't exist in the archeological record, so why do
My biased opinion of the level of technology used by the ancient
Egyptians comes from many years of work in manufacturing.
years (over 12,480 hours) I operated hand tools and machine tools of
many varieties, both large and small, in the production of artifacts
that were crafted to engineering specifications. At the end of this
six years I had completed my apprenticeship and was presented with
journeyman documents, to benefit from as I saw fit.
The opportunities that followed spanned more than three decades.
During this time, I must admit that my bias was further reinforced
by exposure to the environment in which I had chosen to make a
living. The effect this environment has had on my brain, I fear, is
By the time I had been rescued and promoted to the
sterile confines of a senior manager's office, more than 62,400
hours of environmental exposure in engineering and manufacturing had
left deeply embedded scars in my critical thinking skills regarding
how things are made.
These scars describe a path of struggle: the struggle to convert
ideas into physical reality. The struggle is to sketch an idea onto
paper and then proceed to pour, cut, shape, and mold that idea, with
precision, into a functioning device. The struggle is to employ
every intellectual and physical tool available, within those
disciplines of science, engineering, manufacturing, and metrology
that embrace function, form, and precision.
However, these scars also describe a path of disappointment when
ideas do not work and a path of elation when, having learned from
mistakes, there is success. Associated with both, the higher forces
of humility etch a little deeper.
Perhaps I was too hasty in exclaiming space-age precision after
discovering an accuracy of .0002 inch on the inside of a large,
prehistoric, granite box. Perhaps the lathe marks were not really
lathe marks. Perhaps I am overconfident when I look at tool marks on
an artifact and can identify the tool that made them.
considered that a part of my bias could be related to a time in my
career when I had to think like an American, rather than an
But, then, I don't remember any drastic changes there, except the
revelation that engineers are forced to think in similar ways
regardless of what country they are in. That's the price of living
in a physical world with natural laws.
Of course, the other
environmental effect of living in a culture different from the one
in which you spent your formative years is the stripping away of
preconceived chauvinistic views of your natal culture as it relates
to other cultures. This leads to a greater tolerance and acceptance
of the views of others.
The reason I am telling you this is to give you some idea of the
mistake I made in presenting my work. Much of what I have taken for
granted when looking at artifacts in Egypt needed to be more fully
explained. I realized that I had been putting the cart before the
horse. In studying ancient Egyptian artifacts. I looked at the final
product and wrote about the geometry and the precision.
For the most
part. I neglected to discuss all of the methods that are required
and by which these artifacts were created. To me it seemed obvious
that they were the products of technologies of which there is no
What I have been faced with. though. are arguments that cling to the
notion that the use of primitive tools. such as stone hammers and
pounders. copper chisels. and abrasive materials such as sand. is
sufficient to explain the existence of all the stoneware created in
ancient Egypt. It is argued that these tools. in the hands of a
large. skillful workforce with plenty of time at its disposal. are
capable of creating all of these artifacts.
It is argued that the
ancient Egyptians did not consider time in the same way we do. To
the ancient Egyptians (a civilization that covered several
millennia). a decade was but a drop in the ocean of time. a century
a mere goblet. So when an Egyptologist is asked to explain how a
particularly difficult-to-create object is made. the main ingredient
is time. and lots of it.
For a culture that spanned so many centuries. the ancient Egyptians
were building for eternity. By their architecture and building
materials. they were quite obviously concerned about the continuity
of their Ka. or spirit. and the continuity of their civilization. It
all sounds very logical and complete. and I found myself nodding my
head in agreement. I cannot deny that handwork can produce many
beautiful and precise objects in extremely difficult-to-work
Yet even as I found myself agreeing. I still had a nagging concern
that something was not quite right. There had to be a more cogent
argument to which orthodox Egyptologists would listen. It has become
quite obvious that ringing my bell next to artifacts that are
incredibly precise was falling on deaf ears.
Following the publication of my previous article. entitled
"Precision," I engaged in some discussions on Internet message
boards. This is not the first time I have participated in such
discussions. Since I discovered these aerobic exercises for the
fingers. as far back as 1995. my enthusiasm for such discourse has
been tempered by the reality that in most cases Internet debates are
time-wasting and futile. I have been advised to avoid them like the
plague - mostly by those who are closest to me. my family
(particularly my wife).
Nevertheless. out of this masochistic exercise came some insight as
to how I can redress my mistakes.
What I noticed is that I found
myself discussing my work with people who did not agree with my
conclusions. Because they did not agree with my conclusions. they
quickly adopted the findings of scholars who have published their
own studies and who articulated conclusions that are more consistent
with what is believed about the history of the ancient Egyptians.
The foremost authority on ancient Egyptian stoneworking today is
Denys Stocks. of Manchester University.
Stocks's work effectively
trumps any prior commentary on the subject and is invaluable in
analyzing the techniques of the ancient stonemasons. Stocks's
opinions on the subject carry more weight because they are based on
experimental data gathered in Egypt using materials that are a part
of the archeological record.
The opinions of Sir William Flinders
Petrie in his book Pyramids and Temple of
Gizeh (which was published in 1893) and Lucas and Harris in their
Ancient Egyptian Materials and Industries are preempted by Stocks's
field studies and considerable effort. The most recent work by
Stocks was the Aswan project funded by "NOVA" during the creation of
its "Obelisk" documentaries.
For this reason. I will focus on the working of granite. for in the
course of his credible and scientific research at Aswan. Stocks
produced some hard data on material removal rates that enables us to
perform a reasonably accurate time study. The analysis is quite
simple and is used by estimating engineers in manufacturing to
provide estimated costs for producing modern-day artifacts.
What follows are calculations based on Stocks's research on the
amount of time necessary to quarry one granite obelisk. The time
will not include the time necessary for pulling its 440-ton mass out
of the quarry. Nor do the calculations address the finishing of the
block to its smooth. flat surface. or the numerous deeply etched.
Last. they do not take into account the time it
would take to transport and erect the obelisk in front of Pylon V at Karnak.
We will start at the Aswan granite quarries. where we will select a
suitable area for our stone.
Based on the finished dimensions. the
raw piece of stone will be tall. The method used by the ancient
Egyptians to separate a large. important stone from the bedrock was
to cut a channel all the way around the piece and then undercut it.
leaving pillars supporting its weight.
This hypothesis seems most
reasonable and sensible. When looking at the unfinished obelisk at
Aswan. we see that a trench was cut all around the obelisk. and if
work had continued. an undercut would have been necessary to
separate the granite from the bedrock.
The channel has scoop-shaped quarry marks. which led the
Egyptologist Dieter Arnold to claim that each worker,
"sent to the
granite" was assigned an area of "75 centimeters (10 palms) wide and
divided into working sections 60 centimeters long. the minimum space
for a squatting or kneeling worker."
This would be a somewhat
cramped area barely two feet by two and a half feet wide for a
worker swinging a heavy stone ball. and considering that there would
have needed to be a line of workers. each one equally aggressive in
wielding his stone ball. the risk of injury does not go unnoticed.
Nevertheless. for the sake of argument. I will use these figures in
Mark Lehner. in the "Obelisk" documentary.
concurred that this method was probably the one used by the ancient
Egyptians. and he even performed some experimental work himself.
Based on the material removal rate information. therefore. a quick
analysis of the time necessary to quarry an obelisk can be made.
though we might believe that. with a sufficient amount of labor. the
time it takes to accomplish a given project could be reduced. This
is not necessarily true. Within any project are constraints or
So while we may command a workforce of one thousand. a
bottleneck will effectively reduce the number engaged in a given
project significantly. The constraint in the obelisk-quarrying
project is the number of workers able to work on a two-foot by
two-and-a-half-foot patch of granite.
Obviously. this is only one at a time.
The time it would take to
quarry the block. therefore. is based on the cubic mass of material
to be removed. divided by the material removal rate. The mass of
material is the width. multiplied by the length. multiplied by the
depth. (The results follow the metric dimensions presented by
Stocks. which are given in cubic centimeters [cu.cm]. Meters. feet.
and inches are also given.)
The depth of the channel is open to
question. Looking at the photographs. there is a considerable amount
of bedrock removed. down to the top of the block.
It could be argued that other blocks might have been quarried away
from its top for other purposes and. therefore. this distance could
not be considered part of the project. I will estimate. therefore.
that the depth of the channel had to have sunk into the bedrock nine
feet for the obelisk and another two feet for the undercut.
depth has to include quarrying deep enough that a worker may quarry
a channel underneath the block that is wide enough for him to crawl
under to chisel away the rock.
In the following table. it is assumed that a worker is pounding the
granite using a dolerite ball. Stocks estimates that the material
removal rate for a dolerite ball is thirty cubic cm per hour.
there was no mention of the removal of waste or the replacement of
pounders as they became ineffective. it is assumed that the material
removal rate continues unabated. according to Stocks's experimental
Now let us analyze the length of time it would take to create an
For the calculation on the undercut, we will use Stocks's
removal rate using a hammer and flint chisel. I have switched to
this rate on the basis of a reasonable assumption that efficiencies
will go down as the worker has to lie on his side without the aid of
gravity to impact the surface. Stocks's material removal rate for a
hammer and flint chisel was 5 cu. cm. per hour.
Although it challenges the imagination to believe that anyone other
than a diminutive person/worker can effectively chisel a two-foot by
two-and-a-half-foot tunnel underneath the granite, for the sake of
argument I will base my calculations on such an assumption.
also base my calculations on the assumption that there are workers
on both sides of the granite chiseling toward each other, thus
halving the distance necessary to create the full undercut.
Using constraint analysis, the minimum amount of time just to quarry
the stone is fifty years! It is physically impossible to assign more
workers to accomplish the task in less time.
Workers may come and go
to replace tired and sick workers, but at any given time, only one
worker can labor away at that patch
of granite. The 30-cu. cm. per hour removal rate does not continue
unabated until we have a perfectly flat surface with sharp and
square corners, either.
We are still left with the task of finishing
the product, which, in my estimation, would conservatively take
another decade using the tools that Egyptologists allow the ancient
Egyptians to have in their tool kit.
On the base of Hatshepshut's pair of obelisks are inscriptions that
tell us that the pair were quarried and raised into position in a
seven-month period. To merely quarry the raw block in such a time
would mean that the cutting rate would need to be increased at least
thirty-seven times. Tools capable of such efficiency are not a part
of the archeological record.
Along with all previous considerations
and claims of geometry and precision, and now using the
Egyptologists' own data, this confirms that the assertions of the
Egyptologists are incorrect and that the ancient Egyptians were much
more advanced than what we have allowed in the past.
37 - Behind the Pyramid's Secret Doors
What Does Astonishing New Evidence Reveal about the Great Pyramid's
On Monday, September 16, 2002, at 8:00 P.M. Eastern Standard time,
Fox television in the United States broadcast live from the Giza
plateau in Egypt an exploration of the southern shaft in the Queen's
Chamber in the Great Pyramid.
Since 1993, when German robotics
Rudolph Gantenbrink made his initial exploration of this
8-eight-inch-square, 220-foot long shaft, millions of Egypt-watchers
around the world have been waiting for the day when additional
explorations would take place and another tantalizing barrier to
greater knowledge might be removed.
The two-hour Fox/National Geographic extravaganza provided a
torturous prelude to the moment when iRobot's masonry drill bit
finally broke through into the space beyond and the endoscopic
camera was inserted into the hole to take a peek at what lay beyond
The buildup to the production explored several ideas on what lies
behind this so-called door.
Before the show aired, Dr. Zahi Hawass, chairman of Egypt's
Council of the Antiquities (SCA), expressed a belief that a book
about Khufu would be discovered:
"What this door might hide is very
important to know, that Khufu wrote a sacred book and maybe this
book is hidden behind this door, or maybe a papyrus roll telling us
about building the pyramids."
Hawass's comments were taken further by the Egyptian State
"Hawass stated that such doors were constructed
for religious purposes due to the books found there, such as the
gateways, the cavities, and the road which guided the dead to the
hereafter and warned them against the dangers they might face."
The German Egyptologist Ranier Stadelman, who directed the work of
Rudolph Gantenbrink in 1993, expressed a belief that the so-called
door was a false door for the king's soul to pass through on its way
to Osiris, represented by the star Sirius.
He believed that the
copper fittings were handles that the king would use to lift the
Robert Bauval, author with Adrian Gilbert of
The Orion Mystery:
Unlocking the Secrets of the Pyramids, predicted that a statue would
be discovered and that the end of the shaft served as a serdab (a
narrow chamber commemorating the dead) from which the ancient
Egyptians viewed the stars.
John Anthony West, the author of
Serpent in the Sky, thought there
would be nothing but core masonry behind this door.
A caller to the
Art Bell show during an interview I had with George Noory on
September 15 identified herself as an Egyptologist and claimed to
know what was behind the door. Dismissing my hypothesis on what
would be behind the door, she claimed that they would find a space
thirty feet long that contained sacred sand.
My own hypothesis, which we will discuss in a moment, has changed
little since the publication of my book, The Giza Power Plant, in
1998. I resurrected it on my Web site and discussed it in interviews
both prior to and after September 16.
The confidence in Chairman Hawass became noticeably muted as the
program drew to a close. He cautioned the viewers that there might
be nothing behind the door at all. His prophetic comments became a
sickening reality to all of us as the endoscopic camera with its
fish-eye lens pushed through the hole and a distorted image came
into view. There appeared to be nothing there but a rough-looking
block a short distance away.
With inimitable style and gusto, Dr. Hawass could hardly contain his
excitement at the dismal image sent back by the camera.
another door!" he said with glowing enthusiasm.
"With a crack!"
old Peggy Lee song played with melancholy in my head... "Is That
All There Is?")
Hawass's pre-broadcast predictions were downgraded a week later to,
"Everything now needs a careful look. We will ask the National
Geographic Society to cooperate to reveal more mysteries. After this
broadcast, can we expect them to reveal anything but mysteries?
After all, it's the mysteries that keep the viewers coming back for
On September 23, 2002, news came out of Egypt that the Pyramid Rover
team had successfully explored the northern shaft in the Great
This shaft, opposite the southern shaft, posed problems forGantenbrink in 1993. Upuaut II was unable to navigate around
earlier explorers' rods that were jammed in the passage as they
attempted to push the rods around a bend in the shaft.
The iRobot team had a cunning but simple solution to the problem
that Gantenbrink was faced with.
They turned the robot 90 degrees
and sent it up the shaft gripping the walls, instead of the ceiling
and floor. In this manner, it was able to ride over the top of the
obstacles. Of the northern shaft, Hawass had an opinion that was
beyond all reasonable demands of any craftsman living in any era.
Subject to the scrutiny and attention of the world press, the
information coming from the chief of the SCA became increasingly
It is an unfortunate position to be in to be considered an
expert and explorer in residence for the National Geographic Society
and not have any well-thought-out answers for a hungry press:
"...the passage had bends and turns in an apparent attempt by builders
to avoid the main chamber."
This could indicate the unexplained passageways were built after the
pyramids were completed and were not part of the original design.
Hawass speculated that the passages could be connected to an attempt
by Cheops to promote himself as Egypt's sun god. Belief at the time
said kings became the god in death. Hawass believes the shafts,
which have been chiseled out of the pyramid's stone structure, are
passages the king will face before he travels to the afterlife.
Then, one week after going before the cameras in his Indiana Jones
hat and predicting the discovery of a royal diary of Khufu, Dr.
Hawass was again before the press:
"This find in the northern shaft, coupled with last week's discovery... in the southern shaft, represents the first major, new
information about the Great Pyramid in more than a century," said Zahi Hawass, director of Egypt's Supreme Council of Antiquities.
"This is not Raiders of the Lost Ark,'" Hawass said, scoffing at the
idea that hidden treasure would be found.
Hawass proceeded to predict unabashedly that behind the stone block
at the end of the northern shaft would be another door. (Cue Peggy
Actually, I believe Hawass is correct. Behind the block at the
end of the northern shaft they will discover another space similar
to the one at the end of the southern shaft. This time, I believe,
they will find a shaft that is on the right side of the cavity,
perhaps in the floor, but more than likely in the right wall.
Compared to Dr. Hawass as quoted above. I have used more of the
Great Pyramid's entire inner design to arrive at my prediction. I
have discussed this subject with knowledgeable and staunch believers
of the tomb theory. and they insist that it doesn't matter what is
found behind the door; it will still support the tomb theory.
conversant commented that even a vertical shaft that goes down into
the bedrock would be incorporated into the tomb theory because if
the Pharaoh wanted a vertical shaft. he could have one. His reason
was that Egyptology is not a hard science and does not need to
conform to the same standard.
In The Giza Power Plant theory. every architectural element in the
Great Pyramid is integrally linked. Some features can be analyzed
separately. but. for the most part. the Queen's Chamber. the King's
Chamber. and the grand gallery are the principal features that work
together in unison. and they cannot be separated from each other
when considering a piece of evidence.
The features found in the King's Chamber led me to propose the use
of diluted hydrochloric acid in the southern shaft and hydrated zinc
in the northern shaft of the Queen's Chamber. The features in the
grand gallery led me to understand the function of the King's
Chamber. The features in the Queen's Chamber indicate that a
chemical reaction was taking place there. The hypothesis rises or
falls on the evidence found in these areas.
For the theory to hold. evidence that is discovered in the future
has to support it. Some evidence. such as what will be found behind
Gantenbrink's door. can be predicted by what is found in the
chamber. the southern shaft. and the northern shaft. The power plant
will either be vindicated. severely challenged. or even dismissed.
based on what is revealed.
Before the Pyramid Rover exploration. I went on record as being
fully prepared to admit that I was wrong if a search of the southern
shaft did not reveal another shaft. or shafts. that will be
redirected and eventually lead to a point underneath the pyramid. I
also predicted that. on the back side of the door. the copper
fittings would have connections or would continue away from the door
to a point underneath the Great Pyramid.
Unfortunately. as of now. there have not been any clear images of
the back side of the so-called door. so this part of the prediction
has not been verified.
However. the illustration in my book
predicted one of the attributes of the door and the evidence
vindicated this prediction. In my illustration. the thickness of the
block is given. by scale. as three inches thick. My measure was
arbitrary and based on nothing more than the proposed function of
The ultrasonic thickness tester on the Pyramid Rover
measured the actual thickness and found it to be three inches thick
(see schematic below).
Like everybody else in the United States, I was watching the video
on Fox television.
In the top left corner was LIVE and the bottom
left carried the Fox symbol with Channel 27. There was really
nothing for me to become excited about until a man in Germany
uploaded to the Maat message board a high-resolution image that he
had taken of the National Geographic program broadcast on Sky
Television in Europe.
This image seemed to indicate that there was
more to be seen in the area that was occluded by the Fox logo.
I copied the image into a graphics program and auto-adjusted the
levels, which lightened the dark areas. I stared at the screen - for
what seemed to be eternity - at what was revealed.
I know that if you stare at something long enough, you might be able
to see a face or some other shape, but the rectangular shape in the
left corner of the new block became immediately apparent.
adjusted the levels, curves, and colors to bring more definition to
the image and created construction lines (1 and 2) using the bottom
corners as guides in order to create a vanishing point. It was my
intention to see if the geometry of the rectangular shape on the
left side was indeed a true rectangle and parallel with the wall.
Striking a line from the vanishing point (3) and bringing it along
the side of the rectangular shape, I became confident that I may
have indeed discovered the vertical shaft that I had predicted would
be there. Interestingly, the line in the floor (4) is also parallel
to the walls, which indicates either that the floor is made of two
blocks or that a groove is cut in the floor.
In this enhanced image,
the signs of staining on the floor lead from the vertical shaft end,
which is also square with the walls. It appears that the second door
is also notched in this area.
Because the chemical flowing into the Queen's Chamber did not need
to be a great torrent or even of the volume that a normal faucet
would produce, replenishing the shaft with fluid would not require a
large orifice. The notched corner as seen in the bottom right corner
of the block would be all that was needed to maintain the fluid
Moreover, if we look at the size of the vertical shaft behind
the door by scale, it is only about one and a half inches wide and
four inches long.
The exploration of the northern shaft and what was discovered at the
end was predictable and, without any shadow of a doubt, vindicates
the purpose for these shafts as outlined in The Giza Power Plant.
The image of another door with copper fittings and the subtle
difference between these fittings and those at the end of the
northern shaft support the hypothesis regarding the chemicals used.
The electrodes are affected by different chemicals a different way.
In the southern shaft, the action of the dilute hydrochloric acid
eroded the copper over time. Because the upper part of the copper
was covered with chemical for a shorter period of time than the
lower part, as the fluid was always falling, the lower part of the
copper was eroded more than the upper part. This resulted in a taper
of the copper and the ultimate failure of the left electrode.
In the northern shaft we see a different effect. Because this shaft
contained a hydrated metal, such as hydrated zinc, what we see is an
electroplating of the left electrode. This is normal and
predictable; considering that electricity flows from cathode (+) to
anode (-), there would be a deposit of zinc on the anode.
see in the photograph taken by the Pyramid Rover is a white
substance on the left electrode only. There is no erosion on these
electrodes, and the thickness of the metal is considerably less than
on those in the southern shaft. The stained limestone is on the left
and on top of the electrode. Studies on what causes this effect are
still being made.
Though Egyptology is not considered to be a hard science, scientific
standards should be employed when trying to explain this edifice.
Arguments should follow the rules of evidence and conform to
scientific principles. While Egyptologists may say the tomb theory
is unassailable, my view has been that if the tomb theory cannot
follow logical scientific arguments, and be subject to radical
revision when new data emerges, then it fails.
These are the standards applied to alternate theorists, such as
Hancock, Bauval, and myself, so we
should expect no less from those who teach and support the accepted
view. Moreover, the theory should be predictable.
discovered behind Gantenbrink's door, though not yet brought into
full view, was not predicted by Egyptologists and does nothing to
support the theory that this edifice was originally a tomb.
Scientific and social progress demands that we all be skeptics and
question the accepted mores and theories that have been handed to
us. Alternative views need to be discussed. Indeed, they should be
welcomed by anyone who is serious about learning what flaws may
exist with his or her own ideas.
Egyptology should not be immune to
these scientific precepts, though its orthodox protectors' awkward
attempt to force contradictory data to fit an unsupportable
hypothesis gives little hope for change.
38 - The Case for Advanced Technology in the Great Pyramid
What Does the Evidence Really Show about the Advancement of Its
Builders? Marshall Payn
One of the tragedies of life is the murder of a beautiful theory by
a brutal gang offacts.
The Khufu (Cheops) pyramid defies how we depict ancient technology.
Over two million limestone
blocks rise to the height of a forty-story building. Each baseline
exceeds two and a half football fields. Standing on top. an archer
cannot clear the base with an arrow. All this comes from what was
supposedly an agrarian society. forty-five hundred years ago.
And that's not all. The precision and craftsmanship surpass our
modern understanding. Occupying an area of thirteen acres. the
entire bedrock base has been carved to less than an inch out of
level. It is oriented within a tiny fraction of a degree from the
Outer casing stones and inner granite blocks fit
with such precision that a razor blade cannot be inserted between
them. Blocks weighing as much as seventy tons (about what a railroad
locomotive weighs) have been lifted to the height of a ten-story
building and mated to the next block with wondrous precision.
How did they do these things? We don't know. Just a few generations
before Khufu there were no pyramids. Where did the technology come
from? We have no answers.
Any method of construction suggested. to
date. for this pyramid does not satisfy the accepted standards of
technology. But the reality is that the pyramid is real. and
regardless of how they built it. they built it. Egyptians built
pyramids for another thousand years. but today most of those are
Only the older ones are intact. which argues
against the assumption of accrued knowledge. By whatever
technological means these older ones were built. the Egyptians
themselves somehow lost that technology.
More intriguing is why they were built in the first place. In spite
of the fact that no body or funerary object - dating to the same
time that the fourth-dynasty pyramids were built - has ever been
found in any of them orthodox Egyptology vehemently asserts that all
pyramids are tombs and only tombs. built to house the bodies of
Later pyramids had funerary connotations, but no bodies.
Egyptology's explanation of grave robbers does not address the
absence of any evidence of robbers and fails to explain how
purported robbers could bypass the barriers constructed to prohibit
Perhaps funerary considerations introduced after the
fourth dynasty were connected to the marked degeneration in
construction quality. So let's test the "tombs-only" conviction with
just one of the pyramid's unique design features.
The descending passage is roughly 350 feet long, of which about 150
feet is through masonry and another 200 feet is through bedrock. A
century ago Sir Flinders Petrie, known as the granddaddy of Near
East archeology, measured the descending passage. To show his
adeptness for precision, he measured the pyramid's perimeter by
triangulation, as the base was covered with rubble.
He calculated it
to be 3,022.93 feet. Twenty-five years later the Egyptian government
hired a professional surveyor after the rubble had been cleared
away, and by traditional surveying techniques found it to be
3,023.14 feet. Petrie was off by 2.5 inches in 3,000 feet - off by
The straightness of the passage and the flatness of its ceiling and
sides intrigued his penchant for precision. Because the floor had
been so damaged, he didn't consider it.
The passage is about four
feet high by three and a half feet wide and descends at an angle of
26 degrees. It is oriented due north, and today is aligned to
Petrie determined that,
"[t]he average error of straightness
in the built part of the passage is only 1/50 inch, an amazingly
minute amount in a length of 150 feet. Including the whole passage,
the error is under 1/8 inch on the sides, and 3/i0 inch on the roof,
in the whole length of 350 feet."
How on earth did they construct
this straightness, this optical precision on the scale of a football
field? They didn't have lasers. Walk through the steps of possible
construction methods. How could such precision have been derived?
Answer: We don't know.
They used some sort of technology and/or
tools we simply don't know about. But what we do know, using our own
technology, is that they could not have done this by accident.
And obviously, no matter how they did do it, it required a huge
effort. Thus, one thing now is absolutely clear: They didn't go
through such extreme effort for precision in the passage to carry a
body through one time. By any kind of rationale, this should put the
tomb-only notion to rest.
This information has been available for a century. It is suggested
that the tomb-only theory has persisted because the curriculum for
Egyptology has not included fundamental sciences and mathematics,
and therefore does not provide the foundation to evaluate such
elementary technical matters.
So what, then, could be the pyramid's purpose? There may be several,
but a good bet for at least one use for the descending passage is as
an observatory. Astronomy is the oldest discipline of science and
the ancients are known to have been astute astronomers. Great deeds
by the ancients were motivated by their respective religions, and
their religions were derived from astronomy. To them, studying the
heavens was not merely a scientific effort; their immortality
depended on it.
Along with the measurable movements of the Sun, Moon, planets, and
stars, many scholars recognize that the ancients knew about the
precession of the equinoxes.
Like a top that circles slowly while
spinning rapidly around its central axis, Earth makes the slow
circle of precession at about one degree every seventy-two years, or
a complete circle once every 26,000 years, while spinning around its
axis once every twenty-four hours. Usually attributed to Hipparchus,
150 B.C.E., the knowledge of this moving of the vault of the heavens
is demonstrated by ancients far older than Hipparchus, and their
religions reflected this knowledge.
Sighting from the bottom of the descending passage, the upper
opening subtends an angle of just over half a degree. It would take
a span of thirty-six years for an observer to follow any star close
to the true pole (i.e., today's Polaris) as it enters the opening
from the left and continues to the right until it disappears.
seventy-two years would equal one degree of precession and 360 times
that would yield a precession cycle of just under 26,000 years.
It is well known that Egypt's ancients had the ability to deal with
such mathematics. So considering religion and astronomy, the
precision in design of the descending chamber as an observatory
seems more credible than the idea that it had been designed to carry
a body through it once, and attributing such precision to
Another purpose for the Khufu pyramid (it is the largest and thereby
might well epitomize the ancients' technology) could be to serve as
a monument to preserve knowledge - something of a time capsule.
large number of scholars outside of Egyptology believe it preserves
dimensions of our planet, whereby the base perimeter is equal to one
half of a degree of equatorial longitude. Does it?
Perimeter 3,023.14 ft. = ½ minute
6,046.28 ft. = 1 minute
ft. = 1 degree
so 68.7077 miles = 1 degree
360 degrees = 24,734.78 miles
If you stand on the equator and walk due north for 3,023.14 feet,
the theory is that you've walked one half of one minute of
The earth's longitude would then equal 24,735 miles.
Satellite measurement is 24,860 miles, or a difference of 125 miles.
This is accuracy of 99.5 percent. Egyptology
calls this coincidence. and that is certainly possible. But if the
theory has merit. then the only other dimension of a sphere. its
radius. would have. as its counterpart. the pyramid's height.
such proves out. the theory would indeed have merit. But does it?
The height of the Khufu pyramid was 480.7 feet. Various measurements
differ minutely. but not enough to affect the theory. Using the
formula above. 480.7 feet x 2 x 60 x 360 = 3.933 miles. This
computes to a polar radius of the earth of 3.933 miles. which.
compared to the satellite's measure of 3.960 miles. yields a
difference of 27 miles or an accuracy of 99.3 percent. Ninety-nine
point five percent... 99.3%.
The mathematics of engineering does
not allow such accuracy to be dismissed as coincidence.
How could the ancient Egyptians have derived these measurements?
Again. look to astronomy (The Secrets of the Great Pyramid, Peter
Tompkins). There are many other features of the pyramid for which we
have no explanations. so this knowledge is but one example of what
they knew and what we've only known for a few hundred years. But
there stands the pyramid.
Then comes the question of the pyramid as a scale of the earth's
dimensions: Why such a big scale? Why not a pyramid half the size -
a dramatic reduction of work to attain and preserve the same
A hint comes from an unexpected discipline - mythology. The highly
esteemed scholar Joseph Campbell. writing about myths of disparate
cultures (Icelandic. Babylonian. Sumerian. Egyptian. and others.
including biblical scripture) in his book The Masks of God -
Occidental Mythology, found the number 43.200 or its direct multiple
or derivative. In fact. he traced this number back to Neolithic
This engendered in him what he called "ecstatic panic" in
that the supposed independent reoccurrence of this number. he
reasoned. represented some relationship to cosmic rhythm. perhaps
even a universal constant.
Remember the Khufu pyramid's scale: 2 x
60 x 360 = 43.200! Professor Campbell's ecstatic panic might have
been too much for him had he known this. Could this number in some
way have been used by the builders to determine the pyramid's
The notion that the pyramids were only tombs is
disproved. That they were tombs at all has never been proved. even
though the younger ones. not the older ones. had funerary
The ancients demonstrated technology far
exceeding what's been credited to them. far exceeding a simple
mausoleum. reaching out with accuracy and methodology unexplained
Where did this technology come from? We don't know.
But they had it
and then they lost it.
And rising above the Giza plateau is the most
massive monument to that loss. the great Khufu pyramid. the oldest
and only survivor of the Seven Wonders of the Ancient World.
The Modern Past - Ancient Hi Tech Evidences