> Again that is not the issue.
Ya I know we got that even when the advancyness is made of painted plaster someone spatulaed out 70 years ago.....
So now we're back to they can't carve limestone again. Calcite (again what that jug is made out of) is slightly harder than you fingernail......... Why you imagine there is an insurmountable problem for Stocks' methods with limestone, please enlighten us? It's one step up from gypsum and 2 steps up from talc and those steps are not that high..... both of which the AEs made stone vessels out of. Can the AEs even carve those?
BTW, Petrie (1932)'s got a cross-section of a Class V jug made of travertine (they all appear to be made of that, limestone after all is the most common only seconded to gypsum for stone vessels making followed by that "schist"/metasiltstone/"slate" stuff the fringe claim is 'too hard" and "too brittle" to carve..... all of these are in the beginners section of your local library for softrock carving) it's just got the core tube about 2/3 of the way down. No that's not to say that others are not hollowed out they clearly are from the back-lighted ones I have seen in the lit, but some are not.........
Petrie, W.M.F. (c1977 (1932)) The funeral furniture of Egypt: with stone and metal vases. Aris & Phillips, Wiltshire, 65 p.
>Granite? That's interesting, with an overall diameter
>of 20cm. Can you estimate the neck diameter?
Looks to be about half from my image of it and the inside don't look like it is anything close to that imagined fringeism of perfectly, symmetrically, machined cause it's balanced beyond today's technology, sans any notice of the 2 handle lugs, 2 handles, and the copper fittings, "constant wall thickness of only a few mm".........
>>smaller andesite porphyry vessel are too difficult
>>for the AEs to carve other than it takes longer
>>than travertine grinding?
>It that a question or a statement?
Considering that the minerals in the andesite porphyry are altered to fine-grained softer ones I already assumed it was not going to be taken as a question when I asked it...... so I guess it is a statement thus no answer.
>In both cases the
>feldspar phenocrysts (just like the large calcite
>crystals in the travertine examples you keep
>presenting) have been sectioned by grinding and
>You seem to know how this form was manufactured.
Well, as a result of the felspars we know it was not pored from a bucket like some here imagine..... no one other than the fringe is asserting the manufacture of these were fast and easy (which is not consistent with the fact that granite vessels are not that common compared to the easier to carve rocks like that limestone stuff). One can work granite (and the softer andesite porphyry) with a piece of quartz stuck on the end of a toothpick by the power of crayon colouring alone. You're telling me you cannot think up plausible methods of making these vessels with the known AE technology level?
Archae Solenhofen (firstname.lastname@example.org)