Analysis compared lug handle characteristics across nine authenticated predynastic museum specimens (heights 6-14.4 cm) with two OG vases (PV1 and V18)

Analysis compared lug handle characteristics across nine authenticated predynastic museum specimens (heights 6-14.4 cm) with two OG vases (PV1 and V18). Analysis compared lug handle characteristics across nine authenticated predynastic museum specimens (heights 6-14.4 cm) with two OG vases (PV1 and V18) Authenticated museum artifacts display three consistent handle characteristics: (1) symmetric C-shaped or arch handles with uniform thickness, (2) handle holes aligned with vessel body outline touching or tangent to body, (3) handle hole diameters proportional to handle thickness PV1 handles deviate from all three museum standards: much thicker handles with proportionally smaller holes, holes positioned away from body (D-shaped not C-shaped), handles slightly droopy and lopsided rather than symmetric

Mark Qvist, who in 2023 argued PV1 was too precise for modern CNC replication, reversed his stance after 2025 scanning data. He now concludes the stone vase (from Adam Young's collection) is likely a modern replica, contemporary piece, or was reworked after acquisition. He cited the 'demonstrably horrible track record of the Artifact Foundation' as reason for his reversal. Originally claimed the vase displayed mathematically coherent design principles from 5,000+ years ago.

Key Facts

• Analysis compared lug handle characteristics across nine authenticated predynastic museum specimens (heights 6-14.4 cm) with two OG vases (PV1 and V18)
• Authenticated museum artifacts display three consistent handle characteristics: (1) symmetric C-shaped or arch handles with uniform thickness, (2) handle holes aligned with vessel body outline touching or tangent to body, (3) handle hole diameters proportional to handle thickness
• PV1 handles deviate from all three museum standards: much thicker handles with proportionally smaller holes, holes positioned away from body (D-shaped not C-shaped), handles slightly droopy and lopsided rather than symmetric
• V18 exhibits similarly non-authentic features: mild droop, set ears rather than lifted ears, asymmetrical handle roots with one side sloping more than the other
• Museum artifacts show diagonal or crisscross abrasion marks from handheld rubbing stones typical of predynastic polishing technique
• PV1 and OG vessels lack the faint diagonal abrasion marks present on authenticated museum specimens
• Max specified OG vessels lack weathering and damage expected of 6,000-year-old artifacts; they appear recently made with no scratches, chips, or nicks
• Despite micron-level precision in OG vases, their stylistic features deviate significantly from Naqada era aesthetic standards

Source: What They are Not Telling You About Precise Egyptian Stone Vases? by Curious Being