Ancient Egyptian drill holes question

Haven't logged into ISF in awhile. I happened on a youtube video that seemed a bit woo woo to me that was talking about these amazing holes that were drilled by the Egyptians (or extraterrestrial aliens, I didn't stick around long enough to find out). I happened on this thread when I was looking for information about the holes.

I didn't have much success in finding the links contained in this thread on my own and I was sympathetic to Noriabooks and the fact that he didn't find them on his own either. I also didn't quite figure out why he got so much crap for what seemed like reasonable behavior to me.

So it looks like the holes were drilled by Egyptians probably using copper tubes with emery powder. They probably added water, oil or grease to the abrasive powder. But other abrasives and variations in techniques can't be ruled out.

It seems to be possible that some of the tubes could have been molded. If that's the case it seems like the adhesive could have been added to copper while it was molten. Somebody suggested that upthread but I didn't see any follow on discussion of the idea.

I also wondered if a harder metal would have worked better or perhaps worse. I imagine the abrasive particles embedded into the copper a bit and twisting the tube would have dragged them along. I doubt they could have embedded in an iron tube so it is conceivable to me that iron wouldn't have worked as well as copper.

Nice to see quite a few names I recognized in this thread. I hope some of you are still around.
 
davefoc said:
Haven't logged into ISF in awhile. I happened on a youtube video that seemed a bit woo woo to me that was talking about these amazing holes that were drilled by the Egyptians (or extraterrestrial aliens, I didn't stick around long enough to find out). I happened on this thread when I was looking for information about the holes.

I didn't have much success in finding the links contained in this thread on my own and I was sympathetic to Noriabooks and the fact that he didn't find them on his own either. I also didn't quite figure out why he got so much crap for what seemed like reasonable behavior to me.

So it looks like the holes were drilled by Egyptians probably using copper tubes with emery powder. They probably added water, oil or grease to the abrasive powder. But other abrasives and variations in techniques can't be ruled out.

It seems to be possible that some of the tubes could have been molded. If that's the case it seems like the adhesive could have been added to copper while it was molten. Somebody suggested that upthread but I didn't see any follow on discussion of the idea.

I also wondered if a harder metal would have worked better or perhaps worse. I imagine the abrasive particles embedded into the copper a bit and twisting the tube would have dragged them along. I doubt they could have embedded in an iron tube so it is conceivable to me that iron wouldn't have worked as well as copper.

Nice to see quite a few names I recognized in this thread. I hope some of you are still around.
Click to expand...

Didn't read the thread but here is one functional link about AE cores.

http://www.hallofmaat.com/modules.php?name=Articles&file=article&sid=57
 
davefoc said:
I didn't have much success in finding the links contained in this thread on my own and I was sympathetic to Noriabooks and the fact that he didn't find them on his own either. I also didn't quite figure out why he got so much crap for what seemed like reasonable behavior to me.
Click to expand...

Thanks. Well, I guess these guys were too happy in their bubbles, being sure they had just found a woo-believer trying to pose as a non-woo-believer. Crappy behavior. I have only got it from woo-believers for being a non-woo-believer and this thread left so s*hitty taste into my mouth that I haven't written here nothing since.

But I think you're right about copper being better material. They had no problem with it wearing off too fast. Just gathered together the dust from the holes and re-melted it again.
 
@davefoc
I would assume that they didn't use iron, simply because this was happening before the iron age, really.

Egyptians actually starting producing their own iron is debatably somewhere between 1000 and 586 BC. A good argument can be made that it wasn't until the 7th century BC, when the Ionians came to the Nile Delta and brought along iron smelting. But it could be as late as 586 BC, which really is the earliest we can actually support with evidence.

If it seems way late compared to anyone else, remember that Egypt wasn't EXCLUSIVELY limited to imported tin for bronze, and it's one reason they survived the collapse of trade networks in the end of the bronze age collapse. Empires around them collapsed, Egypt survived only weakened.

(A parallel would be, say, China, which also couldn't give a flip and continued using bronze all the way into AD times.)

So, anyway, Egypt didn't have the same do-or-die pressure to move to iron as everyone else. Wrought iron weapons weren't really any better than bronze weapons, so if you still had the ability to make bronze, meh, it still works.

And the 1st millennium BCE is simply way late to have any bearing on most of what people talk about when the whole aliens things comes up. By then there were no more pyramids being built, for example.
 
Last edited:
I didn't read all the replies but haven't heard mention the use of diamonds ... the Egyptians had gems stones and diamonds, presumably there would be plenty of gems of non-jewelry grade.

It would be simple enough to embed them in copper or bronze tubes or pipes with the technology they had, making an effective core drill
 
Last edited:
I suppose it's possible, especially since diamonds were not especially valued in ancient Egypt. The hype about diamonds being the alpha and the omega is relatively recent. The ancients and even medieval people liked coloured stuff more. And in the case of Egypt, the most valued were the blue stones, especially Turquoise and Lapis Lazuli, which made a nice contrast with gold. Basically when they needed something for a pharaoh's mask, what gems do you find on it? Yeah, Tut's mask has Lapis Lazuli. Emeralds were probably a close third, and from there went all the other coloured stones.

So I guess it wouldn't be that outrageous to use diamond for more industrial use.

The problem to my mind is more like, ok, but how would they get coarse diamond dust for that drill? Diamonds were for a long time the hardest material known to mankind. I mean even processing it for jewels could only be done by rubbing two diamonds together, because nothing else would abrade it.

Thing is, the kind of resulting dust is IMHO too fine to be all that much use. Also it's a LOT of effort for even a tiny amount. Seems to me like if other rocks get the job done, personally I would go with those.
 
The Egyptian deserts are replete with free and plentiful abrasive material. The shook it out of their sandals.

There was no need to look very far at all. Sand was everywhere.
 
HansMustermann said:
The problem to my mind is more like, ok, but how would they get coarse diamond dust for that drill ....
Click to expand...

Diamonds are hard but really brittle .. they can be crushed easily with a rock ... but that's not what i meant I mean actual embedding the diamonds IN brass or copper ... as in heating up the metal and pushing the diamonds into it.

After reading then posts here and contemplating I think it seems much more practical to use it in crushed up form as you say .. mixed in with sand? ..

I saw an article just now that talked about using an olive oil slurry, rather than plain water.

Interesting subject!
 
Well, yes, but when emery does the same job and can be gotten by the ton, why bother with diamond?

As I was saying earlier, Egypt used a LOT of holes in stones. When I said waay back that they did probably like a hundred thousand holes in stone each year, it wasn't hyperbole. Door hinges were stones with holes. Vases were hollowed out stone. Etc.

Really, probably if you showed an Egyptian a stone, their first thought would be that it could really use a hole ;)

And that's just the holes. Then were the statues, and those were more common than you'd think. E.g., nowadays you'd remember late grandma with a photo. They actually had a cube statue of her, about the size and shape of a human in fetal position, so not only they remember her by it, but it can actually can support her Ka (soul) if she wants to drop by and have a look see. Grandma didn't look upon you from heaven in their religion, she literally dropped by for dinner. So pretty much everyone who was a free man had a few of those around.

Edit: oh, and you also had to have a star... err... soul gate, for her to pass through if she wanted to drop by. Yep, that one was a big carved and polished slab of stone. And not just if you wanted her to drop by your house, but also needed one in her tomb.

So yeah, there was a LOT of drilling, cutting and polishing stone. And it wasn't just for pharaohs and nobles. Every pauper had some stones with holes. Literally. Hell, even your slave hut probably had hinges that were a stone with a hole.

So, you know, would you REALLY go with diamond there? I mean it strikes me as a bit too expensive and labour intensive, if you want to use it to make THAT kind of mass-produced commodities, innit?
 
Last edited:
Jack by the hedge said:
It took me only a few moments to find this: https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/lostempires/obelisk/cutting07.html

Web content from 16 years ago, describing some practical archaeology carried out for the Nova TV show, including trepanning into granite with a copper tube drill and sand as the abrasive.

So when someone actually tries the technique, it turns out that it works.
Click to expand...

I personally will say that, if someone proposes a method available to ancient peoples to do a particular task, and shows that it works, that is enough to satisfy me that the woo explanations are nonsense. It's entirely possible that they actually used some other method. Most of the woosters are using an argument from incredulity anyway. "There is no possible way they could have drilled those holes/lifted those big rocks/shaped those big rocks or whatever, therefore aliens, or therefore, they had advanced technology we don't know about, or whatever. " Finding a method that works and was available to them is enough to take the wind out of the sails such weak arguments. It would be nice to know for sure how ancient people did these things, but usually there just isn't enough evidence to be sure.
 
HansMustermann said:
I suppose it's possible, especially since diamonds were not especially valued in ancient Egypt. The hype about diamonds being the alpha and the omega is relatively recent. The ancients and even medieval people liked coloured stuff more. And in the case of Egypt, the most valued were the blue stones, especially Turquoise and Lapis Lazuli, which made a nice contrast with gold. Basically when they needed something for a pharaoh's mask, what gems do you find on it? Yeah, Tut's mask has Lapis Lazuli. Emeralds were probably a close third, and from there went all the other coloured stones.

So I guess it wouldn't be that outrageous to use diamond for more industrial use.

The problem to my mind is more like, ok, but how would they get coarse diamond dust for that drill? Diamonds were for a long time the hardest material known to mankind. I mean even processing it for jewels could only be done by rubbing two diamonds together, because nothing else would abrade it.

Thing is, the kind of resulting dust is IMHO too fine to be all that much use. Also it's a LOT of effort for even a tiny amount. Seems to me like if other rocks get the job done, personally I would go with those.
Click to expand...

True, but there are more common and easier to get materials than diamond. But you are correct, that the extremely high value of diamonds is mostly made up by the DeBeers cartel using marketing hype and careful control of the supply, as is the notion that, if a couple wants to get married, the man absolutely has to buy the woman a diamond.
 
CORed said:
I personally will say that, if someone proposes a method available to ancient peoples to do a particular task, and shows that it works, that is enough to satisfy me that the woo explanations are nonsense. It's entirely possible that they actually used some other method. Most of the woosters are using an argument from incredulity anyway. "There is no possible way they could have drilled those holes/lifted those big rocks/shaped those big rocks or whatever, therefore aliens, or therefore, they had advanced technology we don't know about, or whatever. " Finding a method that works and was available to them is enough to take the wind out of the sails such weak arguments. It would be nice to know for sure how ancient people did these things, but usually there just isn't enough evidence to be sure.
Click to expand...

In the trades even today tools from bulldozers to hammers are used hard and tossed off when used up. It was the thing made, not any tool used to build it that matters.

The ancient cultures had ropes, wood rollers, sledges and boats capable of great feats. In Egypt rocks and sand were used also as ramps and scaffolding.

And when the temple was done it was all taken away to the next building site. In time it all wore out or rotted away leaving us a monument and a clue or two. But Ra and his temple were the focus and not a tool used to cut or move rocks.
 
It would be nice to know for sure how they drilled a hole, but... actually we do know for sure. As I was saying, we actually have depictions on walls of someone drilling a hole, and it's conveniently captioned that they are doing just that :p
 
You all might find the results of a search for images of "prehistoric polygonal star-shaped bore holes" interesting. Copper tubes and sand, my a***.

ETA >> google is the least fruitful engine, try bing.
 
Last edited:
Since you've done the search, and presumably found something of interest, wouldn't it be simpler to just post the most interesting link?
 
Deleted - I see that I did post back on page 1.
 
Last edited:
Tolls said:
Since you've done the search, and presumably found something of interest, wouldn't it be simpler to just post the most interesting link?
Click to expand...

Seconded, since even with Bing you have to go to the images to find some obscure and thoroughly ridiculous woowoo sites. What they show are some images of holes with strangely smooth and regular outlines and interiors, even when the rest of the stone is clearly eroded and pitted.

Also, in stones at surface level, and most actually showing traces of moss on the surface, which you are supposed to just believe are prehistoric, for no other reason than that they say so. Because, you know, even though the rest from that era is many metres deep, apparently exactly the stone the wooster wants to be prehistoric, stayed on the surface and got moss. And somehow the exposed hole never got eroded by rain and wind, even if the rest of the stone was.

And also which apparently nobody else found before. Because obviously millennia worth of people in that area must have never found such a hole worth noting :p

It's also not clear at all what role would such a hole fulfill. Exactly what would need fixing in a star-shaped hole in one big irregular rock in one place, an epicyclical hole in another, and a downright rifled hole in yet another? What would it DO?

Basically, way I see it, woowoo by morons for morons.
 
Oh yes, and apparently the only ones referenced by more than one place are in an old quarry. Because FSM knows the ancients would somehow drill a hole from nowhere to nowhere, inside a rock, so it would only be visible after someone cut a block of rock in exactly the right place :p
 
HansMustermann said:
Oh yes, and apparently the only ones referenced by more than one place are in an old quarry. Because FSM knows the ancients would somehow drill a hole from nowhere to nowhere, inside a rock, so it would only be visible after someone cut a block of rock in exactly the right place :p
Click to expand...

I'm reminded that a handheld drill tends to want to make triangular (well, 3-lobed) holes in sheet metal if you don't hold it still enough. It made me think about how a long drill bit with a chisel tip might precess (if that's the right term) and make interesting shapes as you drill deep into rock in a quarry.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom