The Fake History of “Ancient” Egypt

 

When was Abu Simbel built?

The photo above shows the relocation of the famous tourist attraction and archaeological site Abu Simbel in Egypt in 1967. They say this was done to save it from flooding. The photo inspired me to look into when Abu Simbel was actually built. Official sources:

Construction of the temple complex started in c. 1264 BC and lasted for about 20 years, until 1244 BC. It was known as the Temple of Ramesses, Beloved by Amun.

So it was built more than 3000 years ago and recently relocated? OK.

This is the earliest known drawing of Abu Simbel, from 1819:

 

This is the the second-earliest known drawing of Abu Simbel, from the year 1820:

 

A site 3000 years old and yet the earliest drawings of it are only 200 years old. Nobody thought to make a drawing of it for thousands of years?

Asking AI what the earliest mentions of Abu Simbel are, I got this response:

“No documented mentions by Arab travelers, medieval European writers, or early modern explorers appear in surviving records. The site remained buried and unknown outside local Nubian knowledge until the 19th century”.
And:
19th-Century Rediscovery
The temples re-entered historical records through European explorers in the early 1800s:1813 (or possibly late 1812): Swiss explorer and orientalist Johann Ludwig Burckhardt (also known as John Lewis Burckhardt) is credited with the first modern rediscovery. While traveling up the Nile, he observed the top of the frieze and heads of the colossal statues of the Great Temple protruding from the sand, as well as the smaller Temple of Nefertari (Hathor). He described the site in his travel notes and journals…”
And:
Local Nubian traditions may have preserved some awareness, but no written records of those survive.

To recap:

No old drawings.

No old mentions.

No local mentions.

There is no evidence that the place is older than a few hundred years, so we’re expected to take archaeologists word for it.

Another relocation photo. Notice the rods. Those are there to hold cement while it’s drying. The mainstream explanation is probably that they reinforced the structure with new cement.

An alternative explanation could be that the originals were built in the 1700s but they were damaged or the quality was not good enough and they had to be rebuilt to keep the narrative and tourism going.

 

When were the Karnak Temples built? 

Another famous tourist and archaeological site in Egypt is Karnak in Luxor. This is what it looked like in the 1800s, before it was fixed up:

It looked more like a war zone than an archaeological site that has declined with “erosion”. Notice the broken Obelisk and the large, scattered building blocks. This is not the result of erosion. Something devastating happened here.

 

Did destruction happen through thousands of years of neglect, as they say?

In previous articles I speak of a secret war or reset of the 1700s to 1800s. Could it be related to that?

This early 1800s painting has both Obelisks still standing:

The metal rods in this 1800s pre-excavation photo were allegedly laid to support the structures. But some researchers say they are there because this site was recently built to look like ruins and the rods are meant to hold the structures until the cement dries.

An AI inquiry as to the earliest known drawing of Karnak got this response:

The oldest known European drawing of the Karnak Temple complex (near modern Luxor, Egypt) appears in French traveler Paul Lucas‘s account Voyage du Sieur Paul Lucas au Levant, published in 1704. Lucas visited Egypt between 1699 and 1703 and included an engraving based on his observations.
I leafed through the entire book and found no pictures even remotely resembling Karnak. I kept inquiring until I got this admission:
This illustration is widely regarded as the earliest visual depiction of Karnak by a European. It is described as rather inaccurate and potentially confusing to modern viewers…
Inaccurate? Actually, the drawing isn’t present at all, at least not anywhere near the pages suggested (pages 35 to 50 of the PDF File). The closest I found in the book was this:
It has no resemblance to Karnak. Verdict: There is no evidence that “Karnak” stood before the 1700s, much less thousands of years ago.
The next best suggestion was this:
Frederick Louis Norden (visited 1737–1738), who produced more precise plans, drawings, and views of Theban monuments, including Karnak ruins (partly buried in sand at the time). His work was later published with engravings and is noted for greater accuracy and detail compared to Lucas.
The images by Norden satisfied me that Egyptian structures were present in the 1700s. Some samples:
Notice that Karnak is here shown again with the two Obelisks intact.
Conclusion: The Obelisk was destroyed at some time between the 1700s and 1800s.
The “ancient Egypt” of the 1700s looks more intact than the rubble-heaps of the 1800s. “Something happened” in the late 1700s, during the time the whole world was going through “revolutions”.
My question to Egyptologists: Where are illustrations of Karnak in the thousands of years before the 1700s? We have countless illustrations of places in the world ranging back to medieval times. We have artwork of Rome, London or even nearby Jerusalem. People liked to draw interesting places. Such drawings are absent when it comes to the most famous archaeological sites.

The word “Karnak” is a modern invention. It is not mentioned in medieval Arabic or European sources. Scholars seem to have no idea what the world-famous site was called prior to the 1600s (when the word “Carnac” allegedly first appeared, so named by a Capuchin monk).

 

What do locals say?

The locals and historical people of the region are Arabs, Berbers, Nubians and Coptics. What they say about old Egypt differs from what modern Academics say.
Medieval Arabic sources say nothing about any “ancient Egyptian civilization thousands of years old”. This narrative was developed in recent times.
Dozens of medieval Arabic authors, poets and scholars attribute the Egyptian land and their houses, temples and buildings to “pagans, magicians and alchemists”. Arabs called the buildings “Birabi” which is said to mean “house” or “temple” (notice that Bi-Rabi could be related to the word A-Rabi (the arab people) as well as Rabbi (teacher). Birabi is said to be rooted to the Coptic word “berba”, from which we also get the word “berber” – the now nomadic people of the north African deserts. Berbers and Coptics were the original inhabitants. Today the Berbers are impoverished, just like other indigenous people post-1800s. Berber mythology speaks of “invoking Giants” to help them build houses. Old Arabic writers say the temples were used for magic in relation to planets and star constellations. The language inscribed on the buildings (“hieroglyphics”) were Coptic and Chaldean.
This means the buildings were in common use in medieval times rather than being ruins lost in the dust of time. And this is precisely what the 1700s illustrations imply.
The Coptic people, today known as the Coptic Christians, from which we get the word Egypt (copt – gypt), have verifiably been in Egyptian for at least 800 years. The Coptics are good at record-keeping, they retain among the oldest texts in the world. They also say that the hieroglyphic language is simply old Coptic, a language still spoken today. And yet, “Egyptologists” don’t consult them for translations. Of themselves they say that they were at one time pagans and then converted to Christianity. They say their ancestors built these structures. Today the Coptic language is the  liturgical language of Coptic Christians, it is no longer in common use.
Amun, claimed to be a deity of ancient Egypt, is actually a being featured in Berber mythology. The same goes for Neith, Isis, Set and Osiris. Look up these facts for yourself.
This is an ancient Nubian depiction of a Giant carrying two Elephants, discovered in Meroe on the banks of the Nile.
A “scholarly analysis revealed” that this is a man “carrying two miniature elephants”. Needless to say, no evidence for this claim was offered and the “scholars” ignored the fact that the Nubians reference Giants in their “mythology”. Another Nubian site at the city of Naga, near the Temple of Amun, showing large beings alongside small ones:
Nubian statues that show the same:
As I’ve shown in countless books and articles, the ancient existence of Giants is a fact, told of across the world. With Giants, the building of the Pyramids and other structures is no longer an “impossible” feat that requires ancient astronauts or aliens. A Giant could build these buildings like we make Lego towers. And yet, according to the most renowned and educated Egyptologists in the world, Giants didn’t exist and have nothing to do with it.
My best guess is that Nubians, Berbers and Coptics were the same people pre-1700s. They are similar mythologies and ideas. Post 1700s they were split into different groups by “colonialists”.
Official sources claim that the Siwi language, still spoken by Berbers in western Egypt today, the Nubian language, still spoken by southern Egyptian tribes today and Coptic are completely different from each other. In reality, Old Nubian (medieval Nubian) there is ample evidence that medieval Nubian used the same alphabet as Coptic. The Siwi language and Nubian share many words. It’s conceivable that the three languages were the same a long time ago.

 

What about the Pyramids?
I’ve discussed the Pyramids in previous articles, showing they were built more recently. They first appear in ancient drawings and mentions around the 1500s. The Coptics say that the Pyramids were built by their ancestors to preserve knowledge from the flood. A flood which, in my opinion, occurred in the 1200s, not thousands of years ago. According to their oral history, the Pyramids were built by a pre-flood King named Saurid or Surid. The Arabs say the same. Academics ignored what the locals said, and claimed the largest Giza Pyramid was built by Khufu thousands of years ago.

 

A painting from 1572. Cairo was called “Babylon” in those days, another gross deviation from the modern narrative that Babylon was limited to a place in Iraq thousands of years ago.

 

If they were built to preserve knowledge post-flood it explains why late medieval paintings show them as being built atop elevations. And they show that many more Pyramids were in Cairo than we see today. They also looked different – narrow and tall.

From 1670:

 

This is a 1686 drawing of Alexandria, Egypt:

 

We see what looks like mosques, churches and obelisks, column temples and castles as part of the same skyline. In mainstream History, these styles represent radically different times and cultures, but here they appear to be part of the same. They argue this is because Alexandria was a port city with proximity to Egyptian, Greek and Arabic culture. But I say that Egyptian, Greek, Muslim and Christian are potentially modern labels to divert from the old world which was one Empire, one Kingdom with similar architecture across the world. We find the same in Rome, in Athens, in Russia, in South America, etc.

 

Beyond Mainstream Archaeo-Tourism

There are things in Egypt that Zahi Hawass, preeminent Antiquities gate-keeper, never directs media or tourists to, because they don’t fit the “Ancient Egypt” narrative. When looking up “Egypt” in the 2000s, 1900s or 1800s, the photos keep directing me toward the same old sites – the “Giza” Pyramids and Alexandria. Little else is shown, even though there is much more to be seen.

There are hundreds of “melted buildings” (see my articles on Meltology). This one is in the village of Farafra, deep in the desert of Egypt:

More in the Farafra area:

Most people have ever heard of Farafra.

It has one thing in common with all other deserts: Evidence of an ancient high-tech war, using weapons that could melt buildings.

Imagine believing that this is a “natural landscape”.

Go digging there and you’ll be sure to find ancient treasure below these “hills” that were once very large buildings.

I knew I’d find this in the desert before looking. How? Because old maps show large cities and palaces in a previously lush green and fertile country.

 

As elsewhere, the usual unexplained desert grids, here east of Farafra:

Near the desert-village of Kharga there are more obvious signs of civilization. I doubt these were originally built in the desert. People don’t intentionally seek out barren land to build their towns.

A former building in the desert town of Tundayah:

Nobody believes these are former buildings. Instead they tell you that through Billions of years, rocks just happened to have stacked themselves up like this.

The desert village of Dakhla offers more than I have the time to go into here. See for yourself:

Hint: The old village, the melted structures and the “ancient Egyptian” ones are, in my opinion, not three separate cultures.

Near Amheida, Egypt:

Can you see that more must be buried here?

I’ve been to Egypt three times but have never heard of these other places. The tourist board issues stark warnings “never” to venture outside of the heavily policed, “designated tourist sites”. I don’t think it’s because of “terrorists” who are allegedly roaming the country but rather, because the majority of Egyptian History is found far out in the desert and being covered up.

We’re lucky to have this “unfinished obelisk” in Aswan Egypt:

Lucky, because it shows us how they built these things: They carved them out of the rock in the ground. Notice how tiny the people are beside it. What kind of technology can just slice rock out in perfectly straight lines? And what technology would have lifted it? “Egyptologists” have no explanation.

This is a 1700 map of Egypt:

This is Egypt today:

Again: What devastating event happened in the 1700s that turned populated, fertile lands into a desert?

Egyptologists ignore recent Egyptian History, opting instead for things that supposedly happened up to 4000 years ago. But I’d like to know what happened 300 years ago.

Even in 1732 all was well here:

The Wikimedia commons page “Maps of Egypt in the 1700s” won’t show me any maps of the late 1700s.

If they did, they’d have to explain what happened, because in the early 1800s, Egypt is suddenly a desert. It’s not something that “just happens” within the span of a few decades. In school I learned that desertification can take thousands of years.

Egypt’s Wikipedia lists only this event from the 1700s:

In 1798, Napoleon Bonaparte invaded Egypt, defeating the Mamluks at the Battle of the Pyramids. The French occupation was short-lived, but it destabilised the region and set the stage for Muhammad Ali Pasha’s rise. After the French were expelled, power struggles ensued between the Ottomans, the Mamluks, and Albanian mercenaries in Ottoman service, leaving Egypt politically fragmented. In 1805, Muhammad Ali Pasha seized power, massacring the remaining Mamluks and establishing a dynasty that would rule Egypt until 1952.

So all that happened in the time that Egypt went from green and populated to barren desert is that “Napoleon invaded”. But mere horse riding soldiers don’t devastate a country to the point of melting and exploding large buildings. That’s fake history.

 

Related Articles:

The Fake History of Ancient Rome

The Fake History of Ancient Greece

 

 

Knowledge dissemination relies on YOU. Share this article far and wide