Tylor says (” Anthropology,” p. 192): 

“Among the ancient cultured nations of Egypt and Assyria handicrafts had already come to a stage which could only have been reached by thousands of years of progress.  In museums still may be examined the work of their joiners, stone-cutters, goldsmiths, wonderful in skill and finish, and in putting to shame the modern artificer. . . .  To see gold jewellery of the highest order, the student should examine that of the ancients, such as the Egyptian, Greek, and Etruscan.”

The carpenters’ and masons’ tools of the ancient Egyptians were almost identical with those used among us to-day.

There is a plate showing an Aztec priestess in Delafield’s “Antiquities of America,” p. 61, which presents a head-dress strikingly Egyptian.  In the celebrated “tablet of the cross,” at Palenque, we see a cross with a bird perched upon it, to which (or to the cross) two priests are offering sacrifice.  In Mr. Stephens’s representation from the Vocal Memnon we find almost the same thing, the difference being that, instead of an ornamented Latin cross, we have a crux commissa, and instead of one bird there are two, not on the cross, but immediately above it.  In both cases the hieroglyphics, though the characters are of course different, are disposed upon the stone in much the same manner.  (Bancroft’s “Native Races,” vol. v., p. 61.)

Even the obelisks of Egypt have their counterpart in America.

Quoting from Molina ("History of Chili,” tom. i., p. 169), McCullough writes, “Between the hills of Mendoza and La Punta is a pillar of stone one hundred and fifty feet high, and twelve feet in diameter.”  ("Researches,” pp. 171, 172.) The columns of Copan stand detached and solitary, so do the obelisks of Egypt; both are square or four-sided, and covered with sculpture. (Bancroft’s “Native Races,” vol. v., p. 60.)

In a letter by Jomard, quoted by Delafield, we read,

“I have recognized in your memoir on the division of time among the Mexican nations, compared with those of Asia, some very striking analogies between the Toltec characters and institutions observed on the banks of the Nile.  Among these analogies there is one which is worthy of attention—­it is the use of the vague year of three hundred and sixty-five days, composed of equal months, and of five complementary days, equally employed at Thebes and Mexico—­a distance of three thousand leagues. . . .  In reality, the intercalation of the Mexicans being thirteen days on each cycle of fifty-two years, comes to the same thing as that of the Julian calendar, which is one day in four years; and consequently supposes the duration of the year to be three hundred and sixty-five days six hours.  Now such was the length of the year among the Egyptians—­they intercalated an entire year of three hundred and seventy-five days every one thousand four hundred and sixty years. ...  The fact of the intercalation (by the Mexicans) of thirteen days every cycle that is, the use of a year of three hundred and sixty-five days and a quarter—­is a proof that it was borrowed from the Egyptians, or that they had a common origin.” ("Antiquities of America,” pp. 52, 53.)