Look Mama, no diamond saw

[kmt_sesh]

...

Looks like I see a stone saw tool (ropes with handles) on the far right of that picture, similar to what you mentioned earlier. Is that specifically what you were referring to Questionmark?

...

I'm not questionmark but would like to weigh in. The wooden handles with the cord could just as easily be a simple device for determining the level and smooth surface of a block of masonry. It sounds kind of odd but this is attested in inscriptional material on relief carvings or paintings on a tomb wall. The exact tomb escapes me but I believe it belonged to one of the noblemen on the west bank of Thebes and dates to Dynasty 18 or Dynasty 19. It's altogether possible more than one tomb has such a depiction.

In any case the two wooden pegs were held wide apart so that the cord was taut between them. The cord was then run down the surface of a block of masonry. Wherever the cord bulged out, the mason would set to work to smooth that spot.

As for the vampire stakes, you've correctly identified them. Vampires were a big problem back in those days, so while the guards patrolled the necropoli they carried these as part of their weaponry. You know those vampires and their love of cemeteries.

[Gunn]

I'm not questionmark but would like to weigh in. The wooden handles with the cord could just as easily be a simple device for determining the level and smooth surface of a block of masonry. It sounds kind of odd but this is attested in inscriptional material on relief carvings or paintings on a tomb wall. The exact tomb escapes me but I believe it belonged to one of the noblemen on the west bank of Thebes and dates to Dynasty 18 or Dynasty 19. It's altogether possible more than one tomb has such a depiction.

In any case the two wooden pegs were held wide apart so that the cord was taut between them. The cord was then run down the surface of a block of masonry. Wherever the cord bulged out, the mason would set to work to smooth that spot.

As for the vampire stakes, you've correctly identified them. Vampires were a big problem back in those days, so while the guards patrolled the necropoli they carried these as part of their weaponry. You know those vampires and their love of cemeteries.

No, that makes sense too, come to think of it. (Including the Vampires). Thanks for bringing that to my attention as well, Kmt_sesh.

Edit: That reminds me, need to get some garlic at the store next time........

Edited May 5, 2012 by Purifier

[Abramelin]

Abramelin, what if we don't have all the answers? Will that implode your world? I admitted it in an earlier post that we cannot answer everything. We have the tools which archaeologists have recovered, as well as our understanding of geology and how stones behave under certain stresses, and that is usually all we have to go by. We can only frame theories by the limits of extant evidence, so anything beyond this is mere speculation. If you're not satisfied with the extent evidence, what is your explanation for who these things were done?

Isn't that what I asked QM to admit: that he didn't know the answer?

And no, I don't have an answer either (again thinking about Puma Punku), but I am not thinking about aliens, 'Annunaki', an ancient super-civilization, magical crystals and so on. I expect a prefectly sane and understandable solution, but it will also be an unexpected one at the same time.

The videos I have watched in this thread (yours is the first post today I'm responding to, so maybe someone did post a video - or text - explaining Puma Punku) do not explain how people cut the Puma Punku blocks with the precision they did.

.

Edited May 5, 2012 by Abramelin

[Abramelin]

Show me where I said any of what you claim. I guess you jumped over to the fringe making it up on the go.

Again you are saying I jumped over to the fringe, amd just because I said you could not come up with any explanation of how the Puma Punka blocks were cut.

You said in the OP:

"In view of the club of the pre-historic diamond-saw coming around trying to tell us that certain things are impossible I decided to start this thread with images, instructions and videos of how things can be done by using tools and methods available since the earliest metal age."

I am not suggesting anything fringe, just saying that your videos don't show us how the PP blocks could have been cut.

Like I said: if you have such a video, I will immediately post it in my blog.

++

Wally Wallington had a theory about how to erect huge stones, and then showed everyone he could do it.

What would most people have thought if he had just said he could raise such a stone on his own? Would YOU have believed him?

.

Edited May 5, 2012 by Abramelin

[questionmark]

Again you are saying I jumped over to the fringe, amd just because I said you could not come up with any explanation of how the Puma Punka blocks were cut.

You said in the OP:

"In view of the club of the pre-historic diamond-saw coming around trying to tell us that certain things are impossible I decided to start this thread with images, instructions and videos of how things can be done by using tools and methods available since the earliest metal age."

I am not suggesting anything fringe, just saying that your videos don't show us how the PP blocks could have been cut.

Like I said: if you have such a video, I will immediately post it in my blog.

++

Wally Wallington had a theory about how to erect huge stones, and then showed everyone he could do it.

What would most people have thought if he had just said he could raise such a stone on his own? Would YOU have believed him?

.

And I said that as soon as I could lay may hands on a piece of diorite I would give it a try, not that I know how it was made. But as you evidently are not linking to any post I mad that must be what you are verbosely trying to gloss over.

[questionmark]

Gotcha' ya, I see what your saying - that there is a possibilty that some of the saw tools we're talking about here, may have been found and might be in a vault or museum somewhere, just like some of the items in this picture, but not yet identified. Correct?

And that is interesting about the Egyptian words for drill and sand, I've been looking at that for a while now.

(Just joking around here, but if I didn't know better I'd swear to god some of those items in the pic, look like a set of wooden driver hammers with a pair of stakes for killing vampires in their sleep, while the needle like items remind me of my grandmother's crochet needles, but only just ancient Egyptian versions.)

Looks like I see a stone saw tool (ropes with handles) on the far right of that picture, similar to what you mentioned earlier. Is that specifically what you were referring to Questionmark?

(I would love to have a set of tools like that, just to have a go at it. Bet they cost a pretty penny though.)

Buy the way, I think I finally find a technical pic of the copper blade with weighted rocks saw tool, you and I were discussing about earlier.

(Click on the pic to get a better look)

Is this what you were thinking of? For me, it's exactly the method and tool I was thinking of.

So anyway, thank you for the insight on all of this, Questionmark. I've gained a little more clarity about the possibilty of Egyptian stone cutting saws.

kmt already answered the purpose of that rope, and yes that would be more or less how it is envisioned.

Many of the techniques used by the ancient Egyptians were passed over the ages and all you really need to do is go around open eyed in Egypt to find simple explanations, let me show you some examples:

This is a simple copper age/ early bronze age stone azde:

The same tool (slightly better forged and probably not of copper alloy), seen here in a picture taken at the turn of the 19th century:

and as you can see the mason is capable of forming precise cuts with it. That same tool is still used to this day.

Even those who say that they had no time for Egypt and just went to see the pyramids should have seen a scene similar to this:

That guy is sand grinding a block using a more or less flat piece and lots of sand, notice how flat the surfaces are.

The explanation is there but surely does not include a super-civilization, diamond saws or Nibblers.

[Abramelin]

And I said that as soon as I could lay may hands on a piece of diorite I would give it a try, not that I know how it was made. But as you evidently are not linking to any post I mad that must be what you are verbosely trying to gloss over.

So you don't know yet how it was done either, despite you posting videos in reply to my posts about Puma Punku as a kind of answer that could explain it. while it's obvious that nothing in those videos comes even close.

And I am not glossing over anything; I actually reread the thread.

Anyway, you don't know, and like you said, you'll will give it a try.

I'm curious to know if you'll succeed, and I don't think I'm the only one here.

++++

EDIT:

I found a thread on another site that will give you all an idea of what this is about:

http://community.discovery.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/9551919888/m/50319156501/p/3

.

Edited May 5, 2012 by Abramelin

[lilthor]

kmt already answered the purpose of that rope, and yes that would be more or less how it is envisioned.

Many of the techniques used by the ancient Egyptians were passed over the ages and all you really need to do is go around open eyed in Egypt to find simple explanations, let me show you some examples:

This is a simple copper age/ early bronze age stone azde:

The same tool (slightly better forged and probably not of copper alloy), seen here in a picture taken at the turn of the 19th century:

and as you can see the mason is capable of forming precise cuts with it. That same tool is still used to this day.

Even those who say that they had no time for Egypt and just went to see the pyramids should have seen a scene similar to this:

That guy is sand grinding a block using a more or less flat piece and lots of sand, notice how flat the surfaces are.

The explanation is there but surely does not include a super-civilization, diamond saws or Nibblers.

We are talking here about andesite and you show photos of limestone. The difference between them is profound. It is a shell game you are playing to convince others of something for which there is no proof.

If we are to be rational and clear, let's not mix media. Shaping of andesite and other stone with similar hardness are what is on the table. Can you show video of granite masons creating planar surfaces, inside corners, right angles, narrow grooves, and small diameter holes, using adzes, bowsaws, and block planes? With any sort of time-effort efficiency?

No more thimblerigs, please.

[questionmark]

We are talking here about andesite and you show photos of limestone. The difference between them is profound. It is a shell game you are playing to convince others of something for which there is no proof.

If we are to be rational and clear, let's not mix media. Shaping of andesite and other stone with similar hardness are what is on the table. Can you show video of granite masons creating planar surfaces, inside corners, right angles, narrow grooves, and small diameter holes, using adzes, bowsaws, and block planes? With any sort of time-effort efficiency?

No more thimblerigs, please.

I am answering a question from Purifier regarding Egypt, there can be no Andesite there as it only occurs in America and Slovakia. Read the whole thing instead of making suppositions.

Edit: that is at a reachable level, several thousand feet down it could be everywhere

Edited May 5, 2012 by questionmark

[Abramelin]

Say QM, did you start this thread as a respons to this thread, http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=225431 ?

I know I was kind of enthousiastic at the start - I even warned Kmt_sesh about it - but when I found out 'where they came from' so to speak, my enthousiasm dwindled rapidly.

I remember one of these scientists (? the guy talking) saying repeatedly, "At present this could only be done with the use of a diamond cutter".

But as far as i know, he never said it was done with a diamond cutter.

[questionmark]

Say QM, did you start this thread as a respons to this thread, http://www.unexplain...howtopic=225431 ?

I know I was kind of enthousiastic at the start - I even warned Kmt_sesh about it - but when I found out 'where they came from' so to speak, my enthousiasm dwindled rapidly.

I remember one of these scientists (? the guy talking) saying repeatedly, "At present this could only be done with the use of a diamond cutter".

But as far as i know, he never said it was done with a diamond cutter.

No, I started it as a general swipe at the fringe, that is why we are discussing all kind of tools and methods here that do not include modern power tools.

[ShadowSot]

I work with different types of metals a lot. Now metal is more malleable but somethings are the same. You work with a stronger material you need to spend more time shaping it. Aluminum an be cut quickly even in bar or cylinder form, and requires only a little coolant or lube to make sure it doesn't get stuck. Steel needs much more time and usually lots of coolant, stainless even more so.

When it comes to stone, it's a similar thing. You can use the same tools to work harder stones, but the denser the material the longer it'll take. An upside of the time and labor involved with working harder material is it gives you a better finished product which is more durable and longer lasting.

When considering we are looking at cultures that work on scales of decades or longer in construction, the time and effort needed to build something and still be considered a worthwhile expenditure of time is much different than what we would consider it as today.

[Abramelin]

No, I started it as a general swipe at the fringe, that is why we are discussing all kind of tools and methods here that do not include modern power tools.

OK.

Personally I do not like it when people - when confronted with something they don't understand - resort to aliens and all kinds of far-out ideas. That is a sign of lack of imagination of what regular people are able of.

[questionmark]

When considering we are looking at cultures that work on scales of decades or longer in construction, the time and effort needed to build something and still be considered a worthwhile expenditure of time is much different than what we would consider it as today.

That is the main clue to the whole speculation. Unless we are talking about tombs, that evidently had to be finished by the time the beneficiary nipped off, time was not a factor in building nor was effort invested. That changed around 300 BC when time became money by the invention of the latter.

Edit: That would be within a European/Asian context. In other places money was not a factor until much later.

Edited May 5, 2012 by questionmark

[jules99]

The question is: did the ancient Egyptians do it or was it part of a well intended but badly performed "improvement" scheme?

There are many archeological sites that have been "rebuilt" using modern tools/means, there are sites that have been vandalized with modern tools/means. If it is Egyptian it would be a combination of a rock saw and an abrasive (i.e. quartz sand)

I know Stone henge has been moved around in the past and Posnansky might have moved stones at Tiwanaku, but do you have specific examples of machined stonework that have been noted as the work of a modern day "improver" or faker?

[jules99]

I know Stone henge has been moved around in the past and Posnansky might have moved stones at Tiwanaku, but do you have specific examples of machined stonework that have been noted as the work of a modern day "improver" or faker?

Oh wait a minute; crystal skulls come to mind....

[kmt_sesh]

Isn't that what I asked QM to admit: that he didn't know the answer?

And no, I don't have an answer either (again thinking about Puma Punku), but I am not thinking about aliens, 'Annunaki', an ancient super-civilization, magical crystals and so on. I expect a prefectly sane and understandable solution, but it will also be an unexpected one at the same time.

The videos I have watched in this thread (yours is the first post today I'm responding to, so maybe someone did post a video - or text - explaining Puma Punku) do not explain how people cut the Puma Punku blocks with the precision they did.

.

I can't speak for questionmark so I was speaking only for myself, really. I am not an expert stone mason (of course) but I've spent a fair amount of time studying the theoretical models pertaining to ancient Egypt. This includes exercises in experiential archaeology which have successfully shown how the Bronze Age tool archaeologists have recovered, can indeed do the job. This is why I get frustrated with people who seem to doubt for the sake of doubting, and there are more than a few at UM. I'm not lumping you into that group, mind you, and I realize my last post to you was overly snippy—I just get frustrated too easy. I've read the research, little of which is available on the internet, so I'm comfortable with the theoretical models.

Still, I am quite aware that we don't have all of the answers. By "we" I mean you and me and orthodox scholarship and archaeologists and anyone else who tries to approach this from a rational and logical frame of mind. I'm perfectly aware you're not arguing for aliens or super-advanced lost technologies or any of that other addled, sci-fi crap, so it wasn't my intent to lump you in with that camp, either. I see what has survived in the archaeological record, the tomb depictions of how crafts were produced (including stone masonry), so to me a lot of this is not astonishing.

I can't speak as confidently about Puma Punku. I have studied Mesoamerica in only a limited fashion. But it is my understanding that nearly all of the large and carefully shaped and dressed stones are red sandstone, quarried a few kilometers from the site of Puma Punku. Sandstone is one of the easiest and most malleable of all stones to work, so I don't personally find the sophistication of Puma Punku masonry all that astonishing. Impressive, definitely, but not mind boggling. I can only compare it to my familiarity with pharaonic Egyptian masonry, much of which was sandstone from the New Kingdom on, and the Egyptians were expert with it. This doesn't mean I know exactly how the same was achieved at Puma Punku, so I am only extending my own opinions. Perhaps I am wrong to do so.

By the way, I think the presence of diorite at Puma Punku has been greatly exaggerated. I know it was used there, and I know there are many well-carved ornamental examples of it, but the majority of the stone was sandstone.

[Abramelin]

"Sandstone is one of the easiest and most malleable of all stones to work, so I don't personally find the sophistication of Puma Punku masonry all that astonishing."

Sure, and clay is even more malliable, but we are talking about DIORITE here.

What the hell is the matter with you?

The people at Puma Punku carved into DIORITE rocks. And also into sandstone, yes, but their most intricate masonry was done using DIORITE.

I hate to use caps, but sometimes It is necessary.

.

Edited May 5, 2012 by Abramelin

[Gunn]

I can't speak as confidently about Puma Punku. I have studied Mesoamerica in only a limited fashion. But it is my understanding that nearly all of the large and carefully shaped and dressed stones are red sandstone, quarried a few kilometers from the site of Puma Punku. Sandstone is one of the easiest and most malleable of all stones to work, so I don't personally find the sophistication of Puma Punku masonry all that astonishing. Impressive, definitely, but not mind boggling. I can only compare it to my familiarity with pharaonic Egyptian masonry, much of which was sandstone from the New Kingdom on, and the Egyptians were expert with it. This doesn't mean I know exactly how the same was achieved at Puma Punku, so I am only extending my own opinions. Perhaps I am wrong to do so.

By the way, I think the presence of diorite at Puma Punku has been greatly exaggerated. I know it was used there, and I know there are many well-carved ornamental examples of it, but the majority of the stone was sandstone.

I disagree, your opinions on this website are just as well for consideration as anybody else. If not, this would be a boring forum. You make suggestions that can be enlightening sometimes. So don't sell yourself short Kmt_sesh. I'm not trying to kiss your ass here or anything, by the way, I'm just stating the facts from my point of view. I say the more the opinions, the more interesting.

My 2 cents......

Edited May 5, 2012 by Purifier

[Swede]

We are talking here about andesite and you show photos of limestone. The difference between them is profound. It is a shell game you are playing to convince others of something for which there is no proof.

If we are to be rational and clear, let's not mix media. Shaping of andesite and other stone with similar hardness are what is on the table. Can you show video of granite masons creating planar surfaces, inside corners, right angles, narrow grooves, and small diameter holes, using adzes, bowsaws, and block planes? With any sort of time-effort efficiency?

No more thimblerigs, please.

While not a video, you may find the following to be of interest. Have referenced such before, but you may have missed them. The first paper is more in regards to Cuzco and the Rumiqolqa quarry/Llama pit. Nonetheless, it does document a number of comparable and utilized technologies. Also note the comparative hardness (circa 5.5 Mohs) and workability of the andesite from this particular formation (Protzen 1985:170). Also note that Protzen worked this material with metamorphosed sandstone.

http://www.michaelsh...tonecutting.pdf

The following deals more specifically with Tiahuanaco:

http://www.michaelsh...one Masonry.pdf

In regards to more modern reflections of related lithic technologies, one need only look at examples of early 18th century granite headstones. Only Wiki, but will suffice for the moment. Consider the available tooling/metallurgy.

http://en.wikipedia....uth_Co.,_MA.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Headstone

On a larger scale, points to keep in mind.

The utilization of lithic technology by members of the genus Homo dates back (conservatively) some 2.5-2.6 million years, with indications of dates as early as 3.4 million years. The earliest members believed to have utilized such technologies had a cranial capacity of some 30-40% of the current representative of the genus.

The capacity of cuprous materials to "integrate" abrasive silicates for the purposes of cutting actions would appear to have been documented amongst a number of cultures including the ancient Greeks (reference carborundum).

The utilization of thermal alteration in regards to the modification of larger-crystalline igneous materials would appear to have quite some degree of historical background.

It may also be a misconception to attempt to equate "modern" concepts of labor and efficiency with prior cultures. There is quite adequate modern documentation to illustrate the extent and impact that belief systems can have in regards to construction and exploit. Medieval churches and the crusades would be but two simple examples. Current research would tend to indicate that the structures that you would appear to be referring to were the product of at least a few centuries.

.

[Gunn]

While not a video, you may find the following to be of interest. Have referenced such before, but you may have missed them. The first paper is more in regards to Cuzco and the Rumiqolqa quarry/Llama pit. Nonetheless, it does document a number of comparable and utilized technologies. Also note the comparative hardness (circa 5.5 Mohs) and workability of the andesite from this particular formation (Protzen 1985:170). Also note that Protzen worked this material with metamorphosed sandstone.

http://www.michaelsh...tonecutting.pdf

The following deals more specifically with Tiahuanaco:

http://www.michaelsh...one Masonry.pdf

^ I gotta say...this is pretty damn good info and besides that, IT'S GOT PICTURES PEOPLE!

Seriously, it really is worth reading.

*gives Swede a golfclap*

In regards to more modern reflections of related lithic technologies, one need only look at examples of early 18th century granite headstones. Only Wiki, but will suffice for the moment. Consider the available tooling/metallurgy.

http://en.wikipedia....uth_Co.,_MA.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Headstone

Okay, that is some really terrific artwork, but creepy all at the same time.

[Oniomancer]

Concerning the workability of andesite (may have been posted before in another thread):

http://www.freerepub...s/1303669/posts

http://www.warwicksh...0256A250034A7F6

http://mapaspects.or...agropas/lithics

http://archaeology.j.../kamishiroi.htm

http://archaeology.j...hi/asahi08s.jpg (2 of andesite, one of chert)

All hand flaked. It's not great material like flint or obsidian, but apparently serviceable.

It bears repeating that diorite and andesite, while chemically more or less the same, are formed under different processes and thus have different crystal structural sizes and resultant degrees of toughness, with porphyries such the Egyptian jarr shown being somewhere between.

The toughness is of course somewhat variable but Simon and Shuster's Guide to Rocks and Minerals makes a point of mentioning andesite's frequent glassiness.

Edited May 6, 2012 by Oniomancer

[Harte]

The utilization of lithic technology by members of the genus Homo dates back (conservatively) some 2.5-2.6 million years, with indications of dates as early as 3.4 million years. The earliest members believed to have utilized such technologies had a cranial capacity of some 30-40% of the current representative of the genus.

One wonders, Swede, if you can link us to any valuable sources concerning the cranial capacity of the modern variety of H. Sapiens that exhibit the characteristic of incredulity concerning the probability that other members of their own species were capable of accomplishing the constructions mentioned herein?

Harte

[kmt_sesh]

"Sandstone is one of the easiest and most malleable of all stones to work, so I don't personally find the sophistication of Puma Punku masonry all that astonishing."

Sure, and clay is even more malliable, but we are talking about DIORITE here.

What the hell is the matter with you?

The people at Puma Punku carved into DIORITE rocks. And also into sandstone, yes, but their most intricate masonry was done using DIORITE.

I hate to use caps, but sometimes It is necessary.

.

Good Lord, Abramelin, I'm trying to be civil here, but really...throw a fit much? Why does this even matter so much to you? No, it's not really necessary to use caps. It doesn't provide any reasonable emphasis; it merely makes you seem grouchy.

Look back to the video you posted in Post 2. What your tour guide is calling diorite is, I believe, all sandstone. All of the big blocks are. I wondered about "www.hiddenincatours.com" (the producer of the video) so I visited the website. The first thing I noticed on the home page was the plug for that asinine TV show Ancient Aliens. Below is the line: "Welcome to Hidden Inca Tours, home of guide, author, and Ancient Aliens star Brien Foerster." (Bold emphasis is mine.) As I always say, consider the source.

It's hard to find reputable information on the internet about Puma Punku. Sadly, I seem to come across site after site espousing alien visitation, lost civilizations, and other uninformed fringe venues. I know you're not fringe, but I think it would behoove all of us to find reputable, vetted research. I myself have few books in my library on Mesoamerica and have no immediate plans to buy any, but perhaps other posters do have some decent books on the subject.

One of the only websites on the subject I'd feel comfortable citing is this one:

http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4202

In part it relates:

Pumapunku's large blocks are a common red sandstone that was quarried about 10 kilometers away. Many of the smaller stones, including the most ornamental and some of the facing stones, are of igneous andesite and came from a quarry on the shore of Lake Titicaca, about 90 kilometers away...The vast majority of the building material at Pumapunku consists of relatively small and easily handled stones, although many of the most famous are megalithic.

The site clears up a lot of fringe misconception and misrepresentation while at the same time stressing the truth that questions remain. Not everything is known. I've said that all along. The fact remains, we have the tools archaeology has recovered, so we have to base theoretical models on those. Also critical to understand is how ancient man knew how to work with lithics and how he came upon the best tools and techniques to do so. I leave that information to people better informed on the topic than I, especially Swede (see his recent post and links).

Andesite is known at Puma Punku, of course. Ancient peoples the world over were expert at working with such stones, especially the Egyptians. Prehistoric vessels like this diorite jug are a lasting testament to that. Also essential to our understanding of how ancient peoples worked with all manner are the many unfinished crafts and monuments they abandoned, which show the tool marks in progress.

I'm not trying to start an argument with you, Abramelin. I'm truly not. But leveling comments such as "What the hell is the matter with you?" serve no useful purpose. They merely flame. I see no need to do that. I like you and I like your posts, but I'll have no interest posting with you if you're only going to insult me. Thanks.

[Harte]

Good Lord, Abramelin, I'm trying to be civil here, but really...throw a fit much? Why does this even matter so much to you? No, it's not really necessary to use caps. It doesn't provide any reasonable emphasis; it merely makes you seem grouchy.

SNIP

I'm not trying to start an argument with you, Abramelin. I'm truly not. But leveling comments such as "What the hell is the matter with you?" serve no useful purpose. They merely flame. I see no need to do that. I like you and I like your posts, but I'll have no interest posting with you if you're only going to insult me. Thanks.

Well, you know, they don't call him the drunk skeptic for nothing!

Abe's alright. We could all use a snort, if you ask me.

Harte