Hammer (Better Pics)

Jazdo

Sr. Member
Oct 11, 2007
452
8
Iowa
Detector(s) used
Tesoro Cortes,Golden Sabre II, & Inca!
Primary Interest:
All Treasure Hunting
This piece was found several years ago on my birthday. A friend and I were checking this creek out. The air wasnt moving at all down by the water,but this was amongst the rocks.

Looks to be a notched hammer with a very small piece of the hafting still showing in the top side notch
The size is 4" by 3" by 1" roughly. The one end is a flat hammer the other has a bit.
 

Attachments

  • 101_1488.JPG
    101_1488.JPG
    94.3 KB · Views: 478
  • 101_1492.JPG
    101_1492.JPG
    64.3 KB · Views: 489
Upvote 0
Re: Hammer

Thanks Tom . Here is another pic
 

Attachments

  • 101_1493.JPG
    101_1493.JPG
    49.9 KB · Views: 486
Re: Hammer

Can we see the bit end? It actually looks to me to be a natural rock, if it were an axe or hafted maul it should have a groove "cut" into it that goes at least 3/4 of the way around and would have been made by the peck and grind method... leaving a valley of small pits scars all the way around.. of course these can be smoothed over and polished but this doesn't appear to have them- sorry, don't mean to be the party pooper. :-\
 

Re: Hammer

arent those peck marks around on all the edges! Not all hammers and hafted tools were grooved Cannonman.
Some were also notched as stated in "Indian axes and related stone artifacts" by Lar Hothem.
 

Attachments

  • Hammer.jpg
    Hammer.jpg
    32 KB · Views: 425
  • Hafting.jpg
    Hafting.jpg
    57.7 KB · Views: 1,753
Re: Hammer

Well actually no... I don't see any peck marks around the edges to be honest with you. I would like to point out that in your own reference material (Lar is pretty good) nothing in his pictures looks like what you have. You see how the stuff in your own pictures there is shaped? Your's isn't like that. I am fully aware that not all mauls were hafted... (most were) and also that most hammer stones were not hafted.. because they were a hand tool and most any hard rock would do... hammer stones were used mainly for percussion flaking of stone tools and leave very predictable and easy to identify wear patterns... your rock doesn't have these patterns. You seem to be saying look at this... it's shaped like an axe head, and point out where you see notches, but then go on to call it a hammer stone. While most mauls were hafted, no hammer stones were hafted and you seem to be trying to merge the two here. Hammer stones were also used for daily food prep chores like cracking nuts, long bones to get the marrow out, and perhaps various types of clams and shells, but even hammer stones used for this purpose left tell tale signs of having been used. The rock you have found appears to be a sedimentary type rock, made from multiple materials in layers... sedimentary rocks are most often confused as artifacts because of how they break and weather... see, the different layers in yours (visible from the edge) they are most often of a different hardness and will weather at different rates (particularly in water environments) leading to all sorts of odd shapes that are often missidentified as being artifacts. Now looking at these pictures and holding something in hand are also two different things... I would like to see more pics and close up scans of what you believe to be the worked areas, perhaps I have missed something but from what I see thus far it has little to no chance of being anything other than an odd shaped sedimentary rock. I don't say that to be mean, I'm trying to help you here. :'(
 

Better Pics

After reading about the sedimentary rock definition in your last post Cannon I am thinking you are right.
It does look like layered rock or dirt mixture.

What I do know is this Creek is widely known for Indian Artifacts. Pictures of Axes from it are in the Hothem book which I mentioned above. I know that doesnt make it a artifact. I cant really get any better
pictures than these.

I am also posting a couple of other items from the same creek same area.
 

Attachments

  • SG1L2497.JPG
    SG1L2497.JPG
    92 KB · Views: 373
  • SG1L2493.JPG
    SG1L2493.JPG
    76.7 KB · Views: 390
Re: Hammer

A couple more..
 

Attachments

  • SG1L2495.JPG
    SG1L2495.JPG
    86.5 KB · Views: 376
  • SG1L2498.JPG
    SG1L2498.JPG
    88.1 KB · Views: 387
Re: Hammer

Here is one from the same area of the creek... Which if an artifact would have been hafted a completely different way if it is complete, or a salvaged piece maybe.
 

Attachments

  • SG1L2504.JPG
    SG1L2504.JPG
    84.4 KB · Views: 357
  • SG1L2500.JPG
    SG1L2500.JPG
    87.1 KB · Views: 361
Re: Hammer

Here is the other from the same creek...
 

Attachments

  • SG1L2506.JPG
    SG1L2506.JPG
    87.1 KB · Views: 391
  • SG1L2508.JPG
    SG1L2508.JPG
    85.5 KB · Views: 438
Bean i am from South Eastern Iowa.
 

That last axe is very NICE! Now that's a "good one". The one above it.. I actually can't tell... it does look like a very river worn broken axe or hafted something... my gut instinct tells me it's still just a geofact but it certainly does have some interesting attributes. The marks you point out on that first rock you started the thread on aren't peck marks, it's been tumbled about a while is all. Look at that one and compare it with the over all features of the nice black axe in the last picture. Thanks for posting, can't wait to see what else you may find!
 

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top