Discover more from Charles Eisenstein
I just watched a video, New Discoveries that Completely Alter Human History, on the After Skool YouTube channel. The thesis is that conventional archaeology has given us a false history of civilization, erasing a mighty global culture that flourished before the Younger Dryas impact event some 12,850 years ago.
I am well familiar with this theory (or family of theories). Their main evidence is as follows:
Bronze Age megaliths that could not possibly have been produced with Bronze Age technology.
An archaeological record of declining building technology from archaic up through Roman times.
Striking stylistic commonalities among megaliths around the word dating from the same time period.
Dating of certain megaliths such as the Sphinx to many thousands of years before conventional dates.
Accounts in myth and legend of civilization-ending floods, fires, and other cataclysms.
There is, however, good reason to doubt the existence of a highly advanced technological society prior to the current interglacial period. For instance, although rising post-ice age sea levels may have submerged most of that society’s urban centers, we would still expect to find metal artifacts in, around, or under ancient megalithic sites. But no, the archaeological record plots a clear and continuous progression of technology from hundreds of thousands of years ago straight through the period in question, and it does not include metals until much later. Evidence of agriculture too is missing from before ten thousand years ago, and it is hard to conceive of large-scale civilizations developing technology without agricultural food surpluses to support specialization and division of labor. We can safely rule out the earlier emergence of technology as we know it (more on this caveat later).
It is as if two historical timelines present themselves for our consideration. The observer chooses which reality to occupy, and cannot occupy both. Each is inconsistent with the other.
I have known about alternative archaeological narratives for many years, but it took a direct encounter with their physical evidence to shift me into they reality they represent. Just before the pandemic, a series of small synchronicities landed me on a sacred sites tour of Egypt, where I saw with my own eyes and felt with my own hands objects that should not exist in the conventional historical reality-narrative.
The megaliths of Egypt come from several distinct periods. Those from the Greco-Roman era are made of limestone blocks weighing several tons. Quarrying, transporting, and building with them was an impressive feat, but not a mysterious one. Limestone is relatively soft, amenable to Iron Age technology. Researchers have built boats from ancient diagrams and (with difficulty) used them to float five ton blocks across the Nile. The massive population of Egypt could easily provide the labor to erect Roman-era buildings.
The megalithic relics of the Old Kingdom, which was deep in the Bronze Age, are baffling from the conventional view of history and technology. Here is a photo of some of our group seated before a structure from that period.
The pillars and lintel you see are made of granite—a stone much harder than steel. Each is a single block weighing as much as 70 tons. These are by no means the largest of this kind. We also visited a granite obelisk weighing 300 tons, again carved from a single block. I also saw precise carvings and inscriptions on granite, basalt, and other hard minerals, also from a time when the hardest metal available was bronze. Neither were the huge granite blocks rough-hewn—they fitted together with absolute precision.
I didn’t have the chance to see them, but some monoliths from ancient Egypt are even bigger, such as the Colossi of Memnon, which weigh on the order of 700 tons (probably 1000 uncarved). The granite was quarried at a site 400 miles away—an impressive feat considering that evidence of the first pulleys appears hundreds of years later (by conventional dating). For context, today’s largest mobile cranes can lift about 1000 tons.
I mention these numbers because you were not there. In person, I was overwhelmed by the sheer mass and presence of these objects. I can feel them right now, anchoring me as if by gravitational pull in a different reality.
Although conventional archaeology holds that the Great Pyramid was constructed in 20 years during the reign of Pharaoh Khufu, there is no mention of its construction in any ancient document, nor of the other two main pyramids. Mind you, to build the Great Pyramid that quickly would require quarrying, sculpting, transporting, and installing one multi-ton block of limestone every five minutes, continuously, night and day.1 Why is there no record among the many of ancient Egypt referring to those logistics? It is as if the pyramids were already there. Nor is there any indication that the Giza pyramids were used as tombs. Other, smaller structures, yes, but not these.
Doubtless mainstream and alternative Egyptologists could debate these points ad nauseum. Far be it from me to “prove” that conventional Egyptology is wrong. But what it looks like to me is that the pyramids and other megalithic structures around the world are outcroppings of a parallel earth history intruding into the standard one.
The Stream of Time
Modernized humans, immersed in a Cartesian worldview, typically assume that while there may be many possible futures, there is only one past. The past cannot change. Our information about it may change, but what has happened has happened. But could it be that the past itself (not only our interpretation of it) changes as we change? Could it be that existence—past, present, or future—is relationship and not an absolute, observer-independent fact?
On the quantum level, the answer is quite possibly yes. Retrocausality is a topic seriously considered by physicists and philosophers in interpreting phenomena like the quantum delayed choice experiment. If we add the proposition that consciousness or intention can alter the probabilities of otherwise random quantum events, and a further assumption that these events can be amplified into the macro realm, then it is conceivable that the past changes in accord with human consciousness. Yeah that’s a huge leap. My inner scientist is rolling his eyes. Nonetheless, we cannot say that reality absolutely doesn’t work that way.
Maybe the past is right now toggling between two different streams of time, or more than two, corresponding to the fracturing of our present social and political reality.
Perhaps we are moving toward a reality in which history is no longer what the standard narrative has described. If so, we will uncover more and more evidence for the existence of ancient antediluvian civilizations. Is it that that evidence was there all along? Or are we producing it as a function of our own shift into a different world-story?
This would seem to be an academic question, but it has consequences right now. As the past shifts, so does the present and the future as we slip into a different stream of time.
The real issue is not whether ancient civilizations had what we today recognize as high technology. The ancient Egyptian builders did not have diamond-edged power tools (or the industrial infrastructure that must accompany them). The “high technology” of the parahistorical ancient world was of a different sort altogether. Therefore the emergence of this parahistory into the main stream of reality (or rather, the shift of mainstream reality into a new channel) corresponds to the emergence of new kinds of technology today. Well, not exactly new. They would be new in the timeline we are leaving behind. In the timeline in which they exist they are very old; we are merely rediscovering them.
Yes, I know the above paragraph is rife with paradox. It is unavoidable in the English language, which contains words like “exists” that already carry the assumptions of objective reality. When I speak of moving from one to another timeline, it seems like there must be some higher-order timeline that contains the shift. When did it happen? Rather than delve further into these metaphysical complexities, I would like to say more about the new-and-ancient technology of these high civilizations that once did not formerly exist and now are starting to have formerly existed.
Consider the following hypothesis: the way the ancients moved and carved enormous blocks of granite was by changing their density. They had a way, perhaps using sound, to reduce the stones to the density of Styrofoam and the hardness of moist clay. Then they quarried, shaped, engraved, and changed it back again. It would still have been an impressive feat to transport and shape these huge blocks, but it wouldn’t require industrial machinery nor the population density of agricultural civilization. If my conjecture is true, it shifts the challenge to conventional paradigs from the realm of archaeology to the realm of physics and materials science. We are still stepping into a different reality, but one which alters not only what has happened, but what is possible.
Even conventional archaeology is now accepting that pre-agricultural society allowed quite large concentrations of people, at least seasonally. Extensive construction projects like Gobekli Tepe and Boncuklu Tarla bear this out. These sites are at least 10-12,000 years old. In the alternative timeline, they would have been built by remnants of the pre-cataclysm civilization. Imagine what it could have built at its height with technologies that do not today “exist” in consensus reality.
Not only do these technologies exist in a different reality, they join reality’s flickering dance from one pose to another. They operate not so much by making something change, but by entering a reality in which it is different. Current, conventional technology comprises various ways of controlling reality by force, and it draws from a mechanistic view of the universe. Therefore we naturally see “machinery” as the hallmark of technological progress. With no evidence of machinery in the ancient world, of course we assume its people were incapable of feats that would require machinery today. That is why some posit extraterrestrial assistance for the building of the pyramids. But that assistance is necessary only if we assume that advanced technologies of control like ours are required to build them.
If conventional technology is about forcing nature to do our bidding, what might the principle of new-and-ancient technology be? If not forcing, dominating, and controlling, then what? How about asking? How about inviting? How about persuading?
The existence of alternate realms of technological possibility has consequences far beyond construction of big buildings. If the ancient builders could change the density of stone, what else could they do with those tools of sound, attention, ritual, word, or who knows what? Well, we don’t have to exercise our imaginations too hard to answer that question, because these technologies of reunion are emerging all over today.
I’ll give examples from my wife’s healing practice, which employs what she calls resonant attention. Sometimes tumors, blood clots, or skeletal dislocations disappear without a trace. Normally one would think that the disappearing tumor or blood clot must go somewhere. But it is as if Stella and the client shift into a new reality in which the offender does not exist. She does heavy metal cleanup too. Where do the metals go? Recently she treated a child who had a small divot in his skull from an accident years before with a car door. The divot disappeared. When the father saw the child later that day his jaw dropped and tears sprang to his eyes, it was that obvious. Well, where did the divot go? Or where did the new flesh and bone come from? Is there a physiological process that could operate that quickly to generate new flesh?
None of this is quite as dramatic as moving a 100-ton block of granite, but it is on the same spectrum of possibility.
Many years ago I held a part-time teaching position at Penn State. My job title was “Temporary Employee Type 2”—in terms of prestige, I think somewhere between full professor and department head. Somehow I became acquainted with the renowned materials scientist Rustum Roy, a giant of the field. Under his leadership, the materials science lab would sometimes test the ability of shamans, psychics, and qi gong masters to affect the properties of various materials—changing the index of refraction of crystals and so forth. But some were more dramatic. I heard one story in which the psychic was able to cause a peanut held in her hand to sprout a seedling. A roasted peanut. To make sure it wasn’t a sleight-of-hand trick, the lab laser-engraved a tiny code onto the peanut, which was still visible on the petioles after it had sprouted.
I have not experienced anything quite that dramatic first hand, but I suspect some of my readers have. If you’d like, share your story in the comments.
Those who are in despair over the state of the planet, ask yourselves: Does your despair take into account the powers and possibilities that these stories imply? Could it be that despair shunts miracles out of reality, making it so they do not happen, never have, and never will? Don’t worry. Despair is a normal transition zone born of the realization of the futility of control. You needn’t lift yourself out of it. It will lift, and as it does the light of a larger reality will shine through the cracks of the one that is crumbling.
If we are indeed moving into a time stream in which technologies of reunion operate, we should expect to encounter them more and more frequently. As we accept them, integrate them, and live as if they are true, we bring them further into reality. The question “Are they real or not?” does not have a fully objective answer that is independent of ourselves, our beliefs, and our state of being. I have learned that living as if they are real requires more than intellectual acceptance. The self-sovereignty and trust they entail brings me quickly up against core wounds, unresolved traumas, and legacy programming. I am being asked to accept things I cannot explain or control, to step into a deeper level of trust.
You cannot make the stone soft, you have to ask it with song, and all that you are comes into the notes. Stella cannot make a body heal; she holds attention in a reality in which healing can happen. Miracle technologies are available only through recognizing we are not the sole intelligence in the world. Because, if we don’t force things to happen, then how do they happen in a non-random way? Through the cooperation of other intelligences. Therefore, what I’m calling miracle technologies fundamentally depend on an attitude of cooperation and trust. That is why I also call them technologies of reunion. The oppositional posture of force-based technology shuts them out of possibility.
More and more miracle technologies are breaking through into the consensus reality that made them impossible (which is why they seem like miracles). As they do so, the consensus unravels and we start to accept them as normal. As our individual and collective conscious shifts away from the Cartesian aspiration to become the “lords and possessors of nature,” the portal widens and yet more miracle technologies break through from the other timeline. I’ve been experiencing this acceleration, have you? Is it just that I’ve become more open to things that were already happening? Or is my growing openness, our growing openness, bringing them into existence? I think it is both. The more we accept them, the more real they become. The more real they become, the more we accept them. That is the co-creative process of world-story transition.
This is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
Limestone was used for the regular building blocks of the pyramids, although other elements are made of granite.