Abydos, one of the holiest cities in all of Ancient Egypt, was an important necropolis from the very beginning of the known Egyptian civilization. This is where, much later, illustrious Pharaohs Seti I and his son Ramses II built a magnificent temple, known as the House of Millions of Years, dedicated to the god Osiris. Today, this temple still stands and the whole place bathes in a tangible mysticism unlike any of the other temples in nearby Luxor.
Even while the temple is replete with carvings of the finest quality, one of its most stunning sights is a plate of hieroglyphs that is easy to miss but not dismiss: the so-called Abydos helicopter and its nearby carvings seemingly depicting modern vehicles – mind you, those were apparently made over 3000 years ago.
The usual explanation given by egyptologists to account for this imagery is that they would actually consist of a palimpsest – meaning an illusion caused by overlapping glyphs. At one point, the original glyphs would have been covered with plaster and new carvings would have been made over them. As part of the added plaster fell down over time, the new shape or the illusion would have been created by the two sets of overlapping carvings. A rather satisfactory explanation, is it not?
Except that Jiri Mruzek, through geometry and mathematics, has well demonstrated that the glyphs in question do not appear accidental, random or chaotic (which would likely be the case if the glyphs were the result of a palimpsest). It is also statistically improbable that a palimpsest involving only a few illustrations in a small amount of space would result in the creation of four figures that resemble vehicles (a tank, helicopter and two kinds of flying ships).
Still, also of interest and quite supportive of the palimpsest theory is that another set of hieroglyphs with strong similarities has been found elsewhere in the temple. Palimpsests can also be found in other ancient Egyptian temples, such as Karnak in Luxor.
These matters aside, playing with the idea that the glyphs would indeed represent vehicles, I wonder about the context where the images are found. For one thing, the emplacement of such unusual carvings would be very odd. If they were really consciously carved to depict such machines, why would the carvers put such extraordinary glyphs on an ordinary stone slab supporting the ceiling near the entrance? Another aspect that makes little sense is that nowhere else can such carvings (depicting vehicles) be seen in the temple or elsewhere in Egypt – they are isolated and without obvious context.
They are not entirely isolated in the broader perspective of ancient world culture, however. Some ancient civilizations report about flying crafts or provide artifacts hinting at the possibility of such machines. The Vimanas of Vedic India are a case in point.
Since the official position of egyptologists is very clear, it would also be interesting to get the impressions of other researchers – something I am in the process of gathering. As I obtain more viewpoints by different experts I will post these below.
Brooks Agnew, physicist currently organizing an expedition to the North Pole, had this to say about the Abydos glyphs when I contacted him:
I looked at the header plate at Abydos for a couple of hours in different lighting conditions. Your’re not allowed to use lighting or flash up there, and the scaffolding had been moved, so I couldn’t get a great photo without timed exposure. [...] I took about 50 shots of this plate, because the only ones out there on the internet are all the same photo. I am convinced that the plate has not been touched or re-carved since it was made.
John Anthony West, self-proclaimed heretic egyptologist, was very clear about his view on the carvings:
They are not helicopters and tanks! Both require an advanced, highly sophisticated and extensive industrial base. They do not fabricate themselves out of thin air. Do you suppose that in all we have found in Egypt, we would not have found some evidence of the kind of massive industry absolutely required to produce mechanisms of this sort?
To which I replied that the machines might not have been manufactured in Egypt or the carvings could refer to a vision, dream or a sighting – though I personally find the whole thing unlikely given the position and context of the carvings which would be rather odd. West replied:
Yes, exactly.
I see no reason to challenge the palimpsest explanation. It is (apparently) known that Ramses II, plastered over the original work of his father (for reasons unknown) and carved into the surface – in the process carving into the original – and when the plaster fell off over time, voilà: a tank and helicopter. Edmund Meltzer, a thoroughly responsible and unusually open-minded academic put forth the theory. There are other palimpsests in Karnak temple, so no shortage of precedents.
I then heard back from Christopher Dunn, an expert on Ancient Egyptian technology:
I have studied the glyphs at Abydos very closely after taking hi-resolution images with a telephoto lens. The Egyptologists are correct when they say it is palimpsest. Moreover, a true depiction of a helicopter would not have the blades clipping the tail fin, and there would be a stabilizing vertical rotor.
I think these image are anything but coincidental. It is not the only case that is found hard to explain : take those immense stone at the Osirion or Baalbeck, which no modern machinery would be able to lift and position as it was thousands of years ago. Think about the precise description of flying machines and nuclear weapons in the vedas. There is probably much more to be discovered about the ancients and their history and without a broader scope these ‘anomalies’ will remain unexplainable.