all the wedging and cutting in the world would not part the stone. The line of small punch-holes at H, however, was undoubtedly made in modern or mediæval times to extract a block from the side of the obelisk, and it is a marvel that the obelisk has not been used as a quarry throughout the ages. The third method was to cut with a chisel oblong holes, tapering sharply inwards, on the crack to be examined. It is possible that this was the work of the original party, done in haste on the occasion of an inspection. This method is seen at the base of the pyramidion on plate I. The most serious flaws in the obelisk are those lettered _a_, _b_, _c_, _d_, _k_, _m_, _o_ and _p_; any one of these would give one seriously to think as to the advisability of abandoning the work forthwith. {7} Fissure _a_ meets fissure _b_ and settles, once and for all, that the pyramidion must be set back at least half a metre. Fissure _c_ is even more radical. Fissures _d_, _e_ and _f_ all seem to have connection with one another and make a considerable reduction in width necessary; those between _k_ and _m_ carry a similar warning on the south side, while _m_ and _o_ necessitate shortening the obelisk from the butt end. The last fissure completely separates the corner of the obelisk from the rest. It might well be asked: Why was the work continued so long after such bad fissures had been discovered? The answer may be that none of these fissures appeared to be serious, even a short distance above the present level of the face of the obelisk. The north and south trenches do not give evidence that the granite was in a bad state, except at _ab_, _l_, _o_ and _p_. It is likely that the black line π, drawn across the base of the obelisk to shorten it by over 2 metres, was made by the original workers; this is indicated by the fact that, below this line, the hammer-dressing has been left in a rougher state than that on the remainder of the face of the obelisk; further, the trench, which was intended to separate the base of the obelisk, was abandoned earlier than those on the north and south sides, probably as soon as the fissures shewed themselves to be deep. There is a curious fissure in the hole F on plate I which runs downwards and slightly inwards to the obelisk. Like fissures _k_ to _m_, it would of itself necessitate a reduction in the original width. It appears, at first sight, that this is the beginning of undercutting the obelisk, but it is not at the level at which this would be commenced.