<HTML>Sandy J. Perkins wrote:
>Archae, anytime you bring up a reference to someone's
>"credibility" you set an insulting tone. In this case, you
>suggested that my credibility is at stake the longer I wait
>to post my source. You assumed, of course, that I don't
>actually have a primary source concerning cutting hard stone
>in a single pass (see my sourcs below).
No, I did not assume that at all... Were did I say that I wanted a reference to "cutting hard stone in a single pass"? What I wanted as a primary reference is clearly stated on several occasions. Changing the my question to suit your own needs does not really help you in this regards. I will state my question again so that there is no ambiguity:
"... please supply a primary reference for this claim of a 5 turn 3 foot striation on the granite core?"
_snip>
>So I will keep my end of the bargain. Here's my source for
>the description of the longest single cut said to be made in
>one pass I know of.
>Petrie, 'On the Mechanical Methods of the Ancient Egyptians,'
>Journal of the Anthropolical Institute, Aug. 1883.
>This source is given in Clarke and Engelbach, see page 202 of
>their book "Ancient Egyptian Construction and Architecture,"
>where they mention a 20 foot long drill hole in diorite cut
>in a single pass.
>"The hole has been4-1/2 inches in diameter, or 14 inches in
>circumference. As seventeen equidistant grooves appear to be
>due to successive rotations of the same cutting-point, a
>single cut is thus 20 feet in length."
Is this not the original question posed by you?
"I think the question is: How do we get these tools to cut a single groove that can be traced around a granite core for a length of five rotations, equal to three feet? Please explain." <a href="[
www.thehallofmaat.com]; Link </a>
You still have not supplied a reference to your original claim...
>Please explain this 4th D. artifact.
This is a core-hole, not a core... I suspect that it is this object: Drawing #12 (Petrie 1883) Part of the side of a drill-hole in diorite exhibiting regular grooves from Gizeh. <a href="[
www.users.net2000.com.au]; You will notice that it is not whole, but a fragment which is why Petrie uses the words "the hole has been 4-1/2 inches in diameter", "seventeen equidistant grooves" instead of one, and "appears to be", and why Lucas and Harris (1962) reference Petrie's description as:
"Part of a drill hole in diorite with seventeen equidistant grooves due to the successive rotation of the same cutting point." page 71
It is a bit of a stretch to assume that the striations are continuous when most of the object is missing. The diorites of Egypt used in the Old Kingdom had very little if any quartz. All primary minerals are less that that of the indentation hardness of quartz (i.e. it can be scratched with quartz). The mineral feldspar, the main mineral constant, has a very low mineral fracture toughness (i.e. it is susceptible to fracture on exposure to an applied stress because of 2 good cleavages). What this means is that it is not difficult to "deeply" scratch diorite. Stocks (2001) describes horizontal striations being present on the core produced in his granite coring experiment, He states:
"...Horizontal striations, similar to ancient ones in rose granite (e.g. the four tapered lifting holes in the lid of Prince Akhet-Hotep's granite sarcophagus, Brooklyn Museum 48.110), were visible both in the wall of the hole, and upon the core." page 93
Stocks does not appear to have a problem making striations on both the hole and the core similar to those observed on a 5th dynasty artifact with a bow powered coring drill.
Archae Solenhofen (solenhofen@hotmail.com)
Stocks, D.A. (2001) Testing Ancient Egyptian Granite-Working Methods in Aswan. Upper Egypt, Antiquity, 75, 89-94
Petrie, W.M.F. (1883) The pyramids and temples of Gizeh. Field and Taer. London, 250 p.
>Sandy</HTML>
