Egyptian Stone Vases-The Smoking Gun In The Advanced Technology Debate?

A returning poster has been referencing a certain website regarding his information on this subject. I would like to take this time to let the readers know about this site.

Regarding Hall Of Maat website:

The Hall of Ma'at (Egyptian goddess of Justice, law and -esoterically- Cosmic Equilibrium) is the name rather inappropriately bestowed upon a website set up about a year ago, intended as a counter to the various websites (including this one) devoted to 'alternative' interpretations of history. On the positive side, though championing orthodoxy effectively across the scientific/scholarly spectrum (not just Egypt) Ma'at is happy to post unedited any and all opinions on the subject, so in principle it provides a useful forum for an (often acrimonious) exchange of opinions.

On the negative side, since anyone and everyone has an opinion, anyone and everyone chimes in -- which results in an unmanageable volume of material both pro and con the various issues raised. A quick search through the Ma'at messageboard reveals that there are a dozen or so stalwarts on either side of the overriding 'Lost Civilization' theory, some of them knowledgeable. But since not many of them represent heavy hitters on either side, up to now, after occasional visits to the site, I'd not taken time out to respond.

Author: John Anthony West Date: April-23-02 14:10. Source/Full Article:jawest.net...

He brings up a good point, this site is not an actual academic site(as in a university site). It is more akin to wiki.

Welcome to The Hall of Ma'at.

We are an online community that welcomes discussion on topics of:

- ancient history and archaeology

- culture

- media

- science and technology

We interpret these topics very loosely but specifically exclude discussions on contemporary religion and contemporary politics.

In general, we solicit articles directly, mostly from academic scholars and professionals. We do welcome inquiries from prospective authors on subjects germane to discussions in our community.

Source:thehallofmaat.com...

It is a great idea for a site but it is not the academic standard on this subject.

reply to post by mcx1942


Sorry you are wrong, go read the materials and ....here is the secret....look at the bibliography and cites

What would expect fringe and alternative writer to say? ...I do hope you're not going to say Dunn's material are up to your expected standard then? lol

Did you look at the study on rims? Do you understand what it means and how it applies to your theory?

reply to post by Hanslune


All I am saying is The Hall Of Maat is not an official educational system. I just want readers to be aware of that. If this information was coming from an actual University's website, I would be more inclined to trust and believe the information being displayed.

Again, this thread has to do with the work of Petrie, not Dunn.

Dunn was just referenced in a very small part.

Originally posted by mcx1942
reply to post by Hanslune

 

All I am saying is The Hall Of Maat is not an official educational system. I just want readers to be aware of that. If this information was coming from an actual University's website, I would be more inclined to trust and believe the information being displayed.

Again, this thread has to do with the work of Petrie, not Dunn.

Dunn was just referenced in a very small part.

edit on 11/30/2012 by mcx1942 because: addition

Yawn, sorry dude but the materials on GoM are cited from source - the books with their facts are what is important. You'll find the much recent research on this subject was done decades ago. If you refuse PDF taken from those sources - you're out of luck. Did you note the 1907 source for Petrie? what did it say?

Now back to rims did you read that source and did you understand what it says?

reply to post by Hanslune


I do appreciate your opinion friend. I have read everything you have posted.

The main difference between you and myself:

I present multiple sources and ask the readers to make up their own minds.

You present one source and demand the readers to accept the information provided by the site.

Originally posted by mcx1942
reply to post by Hanslune

 

I do appreciate your opinion friend. I have read everything you have posted.

The main difference between you and myself:

I present multiple sources and ask the readers to make up their own minds.

You present one source and demand the readers to accept the information provided by the site.

I have also provided multiple sources, but it appears you don't read them. No demands all. So I'll move on. Nor have I tried to 'poison the well', lol

What the rims study shows



If your theory was correct that X civilization made these hard stone vases then 'disappeared' all known styles should show up at the same time in the early Naqada period

But they do not, they vary, some die out while new ones come into being, the same for decorations on the vases and bowls the decorative trend also changes over time.

Somes styles start in Naqada I and disappear by the 1st dynasty while other styles don't begin until the 5th dynasty......

So that would appear to be an active ancient Egyptian industry that adapted to their customers or simply changed styles for artistic reasons

Now there is an alternative view call the 'pit theory' or amongst us amused people the 'pitiful' theory, that the clever AE found vast amounts of buried civilization X stone ware (and nothing else) and used them until they ran out then found other pits full of different designs, etc.........

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Petrie 1907 book, contradicted his early work because he had changed his mind after extensive consultation with other experts, to include artistans who were still living and had made stuff before powered tools had come into wide use

You are correct, I apologize. You did have more than one source.

You have one other site link and 3 links for pdf books.

Two books are 'Experimental Perspectives', while the other is a book by Petrie.

The other site link(besides HoM) is:www.geocities.ws...

These experiments demonstrate that the ancient Egyptians could have, using simple technology and the material available to them during their history, worked rocks with copper or bronze coring drills powered by hand or bow.

Also, in my eyes geocities sites hold no water in an actual academic discussion. Where are the Yale, Columbia, or any other "real" University links, with outstanding archaeological programs?

So ironically, you are arguing fringe archaeology with fringe archaeology.

Now I may be wrong but doesn't the geocities site linked basically confirm what I have been saying?

What Petrie proposed?

That the ancient Egyptians could make these vases given their level of technology. While mainstream archaeology tells us not.

They would have used a lathe.

We are told that employment of the lathe is not documented before the middle of the first millennium BCE. These stone vases are dated before 2,800BC. Since we are told the Egyptians did not use these tools until later periods, that leaves open room for speculation.

Hence these vases being an anomaly in the time period they are from, it is entirely possible these vases are proof that the Egyptian archeological timeline is wrong. That would mean if one part is wrong, many more parts could be wrong.

It may also be evidence for a lost civilization, a culture that Egypt may have inherited. The vases dated from 2,800 BC may have been passed down and the Egyptian's had to "re-learn" lathe techniques later.

Thank you for reading this thread.

reply to post by mcx1942


Some loose thoughts on the subject.
first and foremost, I am a believer in the power of will. A determined man can accomplish tasks that the average or inexperienced find miraculous. Where some see evidence of mysterious forces, spirits, or UFOs, I tend to look for the simplistic. A man with a big enough hammer, and sufficient reason to spend hour, after hour, after hour, days on end, months, years. I'm not saying more extradinary reasons don't exist, just that the power of will is seriously underated

Egyptians have every reason to maintain an aura of mystery to their past. A mystery explained is not as much as a tourist draw. Oh sure, the occasional ATS reader or die hard student, but for your typical entertourist or for going up against dancing with the hasbeens? And of course, don't underestimate pride. Weren't our ancestors amazing? Visions of laser beams and sugar plums are much more alluring than a bunch of grubby soiled men in loin clothes turning a copper core drill pouring buckets of quartz slurry

Don't you know, that science and technology are the purview of the modern supra-man? Only those possessing the clean sterile mind of science, free from the superstitions of the primatives could possess advanced tooling. Did you not know, this is proven mind you, that history and society is LINEAR. Progress only goes in one direction, forward. To say otherwise is blaspemous. Actually, to be serious. There really is a philosophical element there. To admit that humanity can obtain a level of sophistication, without use or ties to the entire line of mores and dogmas modern society holds as absolutes, seriously undermines alot of beliefs. That a level of sophistication once obtained, can be lost, flies in the face of the idea of progress. That knowledge can be gained through alternate paths, many not recognized by modern intelligensia as legitimate.

In modern core drilling, the core cylinder has nothing to do with the cutting action. It is just a means of holding the diamond tipped matrix while turning. When the tips wear out, you can just braze on new ones. A copper tube would very well suffice, it just wouldn't hold up as long. Copper or brass tubes with carborundum slurry is still occasionally used today for glass drilling. Maybe they used diamond dust. maybe quartz. smelting slag is a ceramic type compound that is no slouch on the hardness scale.
Do not attribute to a tall grey, a repitllian, or a temporal vortex, what can be more easily explained by a man with a hammer, do not leave as a conundrum, what can be more easily explained by arrogance, vanity, or greed

reply to post by robobbob


Thank you for posting friend.
I just want to say again that Advanced Technologies does not mean Extra Terrestrial.

It simply means techniques and technologies that are advanced for certain time periods.

I never once mention:

a tall grey, a repitllian, or a temporal vortex,

I simply ask the question why do these stone vases from before 2,800 BC display techniques for stone carving that archaeologist insist was not created until 1,300 BC. LATHES

The lathe is an ancient tool, dating at least to ancient Egypt and known and used in Assyria and ancient Greece.

The origin of turning dates to around 1300 BC when the Ancient Egyptians first developed a two-person lathe. One person would turn the wood work piece with a rope while the other used a sharp tool to cut shapes in the wood. Ancient Rome improved the Egyptian design with the addition of a turning bow.

source:en.wikipedia.org...

I am working on finding more photos to post here of the vases and stone work from the Early Dynastic Period. Stay tuned!

Originally posted by Hanslune
So if you refuse to believe that the AE could do this work - where is the infrastructure and development of the advanced machinery you feel is needed to do this type of designs? You'll need to find that technology to be believed.

How the AE made granite vases

Question: Are all AE vases 'perfect"? If they had high technology they should be - are they?

edit on 29/11/12 by Hanslune because: (no reason given)

Thanks OP for this thread! Fascinating indeed!

And to Hanslune, thanks for that link =)

If I can find the right parts here (it should be easy for a copper pipe), it just may work. I'm not too familiar with geology, but I have time! If it works, it could be a great thing for the villages to do instead of making clay pots.

Thanks OP for this thread, Hanslune for precisions, and robobbob for the insight thought.
I do also think we have to give some credits to our ancients.
It is not because you do not have much, that you cannot do a lot!
One can find genious everywhere, anytime...
And genious can seem incredible to many people! It's still very much mundane.
So yes, I also think that a very smart AE expert could do magnificient objects with mostly his knowledge and his experience, basic tools, and without our modern machines.
We can see such things nowadays too, you know. Just look around, take a look at random artists, you'll see lots of beaufitul stuff done with...artistic views and strong will :-)

reply to post by mcx1942

It is a great idea for a site but it is not the academic standard on this subject.

As forums go, it's about the closest thing to an academic standard you'll find. The main members are academics and several are professors. One in particular is a specialist in Egyptology at an Oxbridge university which actually makes her part of the system of peer-review that sets academic standards. Essentially, she's top of her field.

Just because the HoM have a consensus that theories of 'Egyptian advanced tech' are BS doesn't mean they are necessarily opposed to unorthodox ideas. For me and probably Hans too, HoM is the best site for discussions about the earliest populations of the Americas. They regularly discuss the evidence for pre-Clovis migrations and link to papers that would otherwise be difficult to come by.

AGW's attempt to dumb it down to the level of 'just another forum' is typical of the fringe guys' innate dishonesty. They always seek to devalue academic subject-knowledge and claim persecution when that fails.

Thank you all for your posts. This has became a very interesting thread.

I want to post some more pictures of the Early Dynastic Period work as well as provide links on information of the time period as well.


THE PREDYNASTIC PERIOD

www.namuseum.gr...
ancientegyptonline.co.uk...
www.antiquityofman.com...
www.historyfiles.co.uk...
www.egyptorigins.org...
www.unm.edu...


THE ARTWORK

people.csail.mit.edu...
www.nytimes.com...
www.scholastic.com...
xoomer.virgilio.it...
www.perankhgroup.com...

Now for some more pictures Enjoy!

Originally posted by Hanslune
So if you refuse to believe that the AE could do this work - where is the infrastructure and development of the advanced machinery you feel is needed to do this type of designs? You'll need to find that technology to be believed.

How the AE made granite vases

Question: Are all AE vases 'perfect"? If they had high technology they should be - are they?

edit on 29/11/12 by Hanslune because: (no reason given)

what makes you an authority on AE technology? Maybe they don't believe in leaving their garbage lying around? infrastructure! what did you have in mind? remember now we're talking about Type I and II civilizations, are you expecting rusty old steam engines?

Tell me this if the AE were so advanced and turned out awesome pottery without assistance from an advanced culture how is it that the quality of goods has declined and they went backwards even the later pyramids were mere shadows of the older ones and today we are buying crappy cheap plastic plates and bowls from china?

reply to post by mcx1942
If you cut or turn stone it is almost the same as cutting or turning wood, it's a lot harder, but I'm sure they had diamonds to cut, turn with.

If you ever ground glass for a telescope lens, it 's a lot of revolutions to grind the lens, a lot of people, a lot of elbow grease, but once done, it will remain.

Originally posted by cookiemonster32
Tell me this if the AE were so advanced and turned out awesome pottery without assistance from an advanced culture how is it that the quality of goods has declined and they went backwards even the later pyramids were mere shadows of the older ones and today we are buying crappy cheap plastic plates and bowls from china?

Probably for the same reason that the quality of cathedrals declined in a more modern time, don't you think?

Harte

The vase that gets me is the one with the flint/schist fluted neck. i just shake my head in aggravation, every time i see that.

I do not think that the ancients possessed any advanced technologies by today's standards, but I agree that they accomplished things we would struggle with today. However, this has nothing to do with technology, or not all that much anyway, and has more to do with the ancient forms of government, economy, mindset, etc. People of those days were not daunted by undertaking a task they were not going to complete in their lifetimes.

Unlike most people today, a person would spend a lengthy amount of time, even years, to complete one piece of whatever he or she was creating. It reminds me of the saying "If there is a will, there is a way." People today just do not think along the same lines in my opinion. I cannot be sure what methods were employed in creating many ancient masterpieces, but there has been no evidence to my knowledge that suggests the use of anything beyond available tools, sheer grit, and ingenuity.

Hello mcx1942.....

Please excuse Hans' bad manners.....he does cherry pick when it suits him....

IE....he puts you down because you reference Petrie 1907......

Yet the lip chart that he linked to uses Petrie 1977 as a reference......must be a reprint because Petrie died in 1942.....

So it's ok for Aston,BG..1994.ancient egyptian stone vessels......to use a reprint of Petrie.....as the reference on the H of M...pdf by Achae Solenhofen....which is dated 2012....

Now I have ....David Wengrow....the archaeology of early egypt...cambridge press 2006...
.............Toby Wilkinson....early dynastic egypt...........routledge press 1999.....
Both these publications quote Petrie ...no problems.....

So what's going on here??.....is Han's being a cherry picker??.....It appears so.....

mcx1942....do you ask a plumber to explain electricty????

I'm sure Hans has a wealth of knowledge on aspects of history....but stone working as we are looking at ....old kingdom vases and bowls....his opinion is based on the studies of other peoples work.....theorectical not applied...

I might be wrong but....no oligist has copied....duplicated or reproduced an old kingdom vessel using the methods as discribed by the theorectical experts....ie stone carved on some contraption made out of twigs......

Modern man reproduced the Antikythera device ....explained its mechanisms/pieces.....no problem.....

Stone vases ...nothing practical.....only more studies/clasifaction...some cad visualizations[ lazy mans tool ]...

None of the experts on this site make their income from carving stone.....