Artifacts/Rocks? - I am stumped!

Dougie Webb

Sr. Member
Jun 14, 2019
402
697
Stone Mountain, Georgia
Detector(s) used
Fisher F5
Garrett Ace 200
Primary Interest:
Metal Detecting
Hi all!

I generally do what I can to figure out my new finds, because I don't want to be that noobie who's always asking for help, but I need it here! I even showed this stuff to a local geology professor and he had no idea.

I'll say in advance that I err on the side of "TMI" but I've seen so many posts from newcomers where they throw up one dimly lit picture with no context and say "hellloooo, what is it?!?!"

What I have here is a series of finds over the past couple of weeks in the same general area (within 20 feet). For the purpose of semantics, I'll say there's two pieces of "pottery" and two "rocks" that I'm pretty sure are related. When I first discovered these in the ground with my Garrett 200, I was getting readings between 80-90 (the "coins" section), but after I unearthed them, and inspected them closer, I started getting different readings when I hit from different angles...in addition to ~90 (which is still the principal reading), I also get around 40 ("nickel") consistently and in the low 60's (rings/jewelry) occasionally. I also picked up a few scant beeps in the "iron" category (1-20). I know these numbers are relative, but at least maybe this helps with a baseline.

A little on geography. I live about 5 miles as the crow flies from Stone Mountain, GA, and these were all found at the edge of Snapfinger Creek (near its source).

One thing to note is that all of these pieces are very light. The pottery shards have the sound of a plate when you drop them on the counter. The rocks feel lighter than you would expect a real rock to weigh.

This is the first shard on a piece of letter paper for size comparison (it's about six inches long). I cleaned this six ways from Sunday (silver polish, baking soda, steel brush, and even, yes, dishwasher). At first glance, I thought this might be a piece of pipe, but the fact that it is so brittle/light and the "ridges" on the side make me doubt that...in addition to the fact that I've found old pieces of actual pipe about 100 feet away from this and they are the traditional, heavy iron type. Also, although the ridges you see below are mostly symmetrical, they are not perfect in terms of spacing and size. I took a caliper to it and there are variances of up to a sixteenth of an inch.
11.jpg

A close-up on the same side
15.jpg

The reverse side
14.jpg

Hopefully you can see the details on the ridges
16.jpg

This will help see the curvature
12.jpg

The bottom of the shard has this protrusion
13.jpg

This is a smaller shard found closeby. It's been cleaned but did not go through the dishwasher like the bigger piece.
17.jpg

And the top lip of this smaller shard has detail the larger piece did not
18.jpg

The first of the "rocks"
20.jpg

Other side - note how symmetrical the circle is
21.jpg

Finally, the other "rock." But again, this shape seems very non-natural, as does the weight...
23.jpg

I really would appreciate any help at all you can lend! Thanks!
 

Welcome to Tnet.

Those are fossils, not artefacts. The first pictures look to me like broken/flattened pieces from the shells of orthocone nautiloids:

Orthocone.jpg Orthocone Diagram.jpg
 

Upvote 0
Upvote 0
Last picture looks like a piece of rebar (reenforcing rod for concrete)
 

Upvote 0
Wow! That would be amazing. How convinced are you? What would account for it setting off a metal detector?

I can only go by what I can see and what the pieces most resemble. Examination in-hand might tell a different story. The last item is anyone's guess. Are any of them actually attracted to a magnet?
 

Upvote 0
I can only go by what I can see and what the pieces most resemble. Examination in-hand might tell a different story. The last item is anyone's guess. Are any of them actually attracted to a magnet?

I appreciate it for sure. It at least allowed me to look in a different direction that I hadn't considered.

None of the pieces attract a magnet. After doing some research, I see that many of the metallic minerals found in Georgia are found in fossils. The pattern sure resembles the photo you shared.
 

Upvote 0
I don't think they are native American pottery fragments. I don't see the expected small shell fragments or other items commonly used for tempering native American pottery.

Those you indicate pottery shards have the sound of a plate, possibly are just that, broken pottery. But I would say they may be more likely 1920s to 1950s.

Most of the native American pottery fragments I have found in my area are shell tempered and small. Small from softening from years of being waterlogged or damaged by farm implements. I have never found any native American pottery fragments metal detecting. I suspect if found metal detecting and you lifted that size of a fragment without damaging it further its not native American pottery fragments.

But I could be wrong, I am making this judgment call from photos, like others here.
 

Upvote 0
I don't think they are native American pottery fragments. I don't see the expected small shell fragments or other items commonly used for tempering native American pottery.

Those you indicate pottery shards have the sound of a plate, possibly are just that, broken pottery. But I would say they may be more likely 1920s to 1950s.

Most of the native American pottery fragments I have found in my area are shell tempered and small. Small from softening from years of being waterlogged or damaged by farm implements. I have never found any native American pottery fragments metal detecting. I suspect if found metal detecting and you lifted that size of a fragment without damaging it further its not native American pottery fragments.

But I could be wrong, I am making this judgment call from photos, like others here.

That makes sense to me. The lines are so symmetrical it would seem to indicate something newer. A friend even suggested it might be part of an old moonshine still, which given this part of the country and what our neighborhood land used to be, is plausible.
 

Upvote 0
Thank you all for taking time to look at my little novel. I have a friend who is an anthropology professor who also used to do some archeology field work, so she is going to reach out to one of her colleagues to take a look. I will let you all know if I'm able to solve it.
 

Upvote 0

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top