Large scraper with thum divot.

[jamus peek]

I have found a few scrapers and cutting tools. I am hunting in a creek bed that has lots of flint chips and noticed some possible cores. This one is my favorite so far.
View attachment 1337277

Here is a view of the point
View attachment 1337278

The bottom is nice and flat
View attachment 1337279

Really nice thumb divot
View attachment 1337280

Fits snug in the hand and still sharp
View attachment 1337281

Found another one almost Identical but with the point broken. Should of took it.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Minelab PRO-FIND 35 Waterproof Pinpointer Metal Detector for Experts with Tone ID & Adjustable Sensitivity - Grab it through Amazon!

[old digger]

I do not believe that your item was worked or used as a scraper. Keep looking though.

 

[jamus peek]

Thanks for the reply!

 

[Calgarychef]

I agree, there's no man made flaking on that item. I'd suggest not looking for things that fit your had but instead looking for items with obvious marks of having been worked. Look for alternate flaking especially

 

[jamus peek]

Not every rock tool was knapped. There were different methods to. I will post another tool that was knapped. I will let others chime in first.

 

[Indian Steve]

Sorry, just a natural.

 

[jamus peek]

Here is an angle from the back sitting flat on the ground. You can see a thumb divot on the left side angled in. On the right side you can see a protruded angle perfect for wrapping the index finger around. Also you can notice that the front edge where the point starts is perfectly in line with the back.

View attachment 1337514

Here is another closer picture of the bottom. You can clearly see several markings running parallel across the specimen as if a tool was working the specimen. Also if you look closely you can see small ridges where flaked off.

View attachment 1337515

Here is a grooved axe head made with a similar agate type rock that has been worked in a different manner then typical flint knapping.

View attachment 1337516

Keep in mind I am not certain of anything. I believe however there is a lot more evidence here then the comments suggest.

perfectly flat bottom, point in line with the back end. Thumb divot, index finger wrap, also if you look closely on the bottom there is a perfect place for a pinky to rest. Fits perfectly in the hand and very comfortable to push.The markings on the knapped side being parallel with each other and the ridges on the flat bottom as well as on the angle down to the point.

Also several other items found which I will post with in a very short distance. Also a shell mound not to far away and well known mortars fairly close.

With all that being stated I appreciate the feed back.

 

[unclemac]

show us that axe head...

your other scraper is a creek broke rock, its shape, even though it fits nice in your hand, would make it a poor cutting/scraping tool.

 

[jamus peek]

Where did I mention this is my axe head. The edge is sharp and elongated so not sure why you would insinuate that this would be a poor scraping tool. Also this would be a great chopping tool.Thanks for your opinion though.

 

[galenrog]

I would urge you to take ALL your stone tools to a qualified professional for proper identification.

 

[unclemac]

Where did I mention this is my axe head. The edge is sharp and elongated so not sure why you would insinuate that this would be a poor scraping tool. Also this would be a great chopping tool.Thanks for your opinion though.

no, i dont mean that ....show us better pix of the axe head you also posted

 

[jamus peek]

I would urge you to take ALL your stone tools to a qualified professional for proper identification.

Hi Galenrog. Yeah I agree! I also know that if there were some more obvious features most of the comments would be nice scraper and so on. I don't think anybody wants to say it's just a rock. Also what I have noticed is if there isn't typical markings that most people will write off the specimen as nothing. What is overlooked is originality because there is not much to compare to. Thus the reason I have tried to point out that statistically there are to many features to write this specimen off. Also several things I have pointed out have not been properly addressed. If they were properly addressed then I could get over it and move on. Or get a professional opinion like you say. A maybe would be accepted but just a rock would be to closed minded in my opinion in this particular case with the information I have provided.

 

[monsterrack]

The axe head you have shown was made by peck and grinding method, no type of flint knapping. The rock in the 1st few photos Is a broken stone, just because it looks to have a thumb hole does not make it one and it would not be worth the time to make a thumb hole on such a crude tool. It would take more time to make the thumb hole than to make the tool. The stone has to many hair line cracks to be any type of tool, due to the fact it would crumble apart and that is what has made the hinge breaks that can be seen on it. Now a N.A. may have picked it up and tested the stone for is knapping use, but JMO they didn't make a tool out it. This is JMO but I do know stone and fracture mechanics down to a art, but that is a fine grooved axe you have in the last photo.

 

[austin]

Guy, I am pushin 70 and have found dozens of scrapers down here. So have most of the people that have posted on your thread. Your "scraper" is just a rock. If you don't believe that then believe what you will. Maybe it's a martian scraper used to get space crud off the viewscreen after a long and tiring journey. Folks are trying to help you...

 

[jamus peek]

Guy, I am pushin 70 and have found dozens of scrapers down here. So have most of the people that have posted on your thread. Your "scraper" is just a rock. If you don't believe that then believe what you will. Maybe it's a martian scraper used to get space crud off the viewscreen after a long and tiring journey. Folks are trying to help you...

First off my name isn't guy learn some proper etiquette. Being 70 I think you would have learned that by now. I am not claiming anything. Maybe you are a reincarnated Indian and saw every tool that was made if so good for you.

 

[jamus peek]

The axe head you have shown was made by peck and grinding method, no type of flint knapping. The rock in the 1st few photos Is a broken stone, just because it looks to have a thumb hole does not make it one and it would not be worth the time to make a thumb hole on such a crude tool. It would take more time to make the thumb hole than to make the tool. The stone has to many hair line cracks to be any type of tool, due to the fact it would crumble apart and that is what has made the hinge breaks that can be seen on it. Now a N.A. may have picked it up and tested the stone for is knapping use, but JMO they didn't make a tool out it. This is JMO but I do know stone and fracture mechanics down to a art, but that is a fine grooved axe you have in the last photo.

This specimen is solid those are not hairline cracks they are very shallow and parallel to each other. I appreciate you're opinion and the way you and others have given there's.
Also I have no problem with being wrong as you can notice in previous postings. I do however feel strongly about this specimen due to it's location and also the physical comfort ability and the sharpness of the edge.

This hammerstone with markings of a face was found with in 20 ft as well as other tools some posted and agreed could be tools.. First picture face of stone. Second picture the use from hammering. Third picture thumb groove. fourth picture fits snug in the fingers.

View attachment 1337699 View attachment 1337702 View attachment 1337703View attachment 1337705

 

[jamus peek]

This specimen is solid those are not hairline cracks they are very shallow and parallel to each other. I appreciate you're opinion and the way you and others have given there's.
Also I have no problem with being wrong as you can notice in previous postings. I do however feel strongly about this specimen due to it's location and also the physical comfort ability and the sharpness of the edge.

This hammerstone with markings of a face was found with in 20 ft as well as other tools some posted and agreed could be tools.. First picture face of stone. Second picture the use from hammering. Third picture thumb groove. fourth picture fits snug in the fingers.

View attachment 1337699 View attachment 1337702 View attachment 1337703View attachment 1337705

Also this possible more familiar scraping tool.
View attachment 1337721

I don't want to post all my finds in the same topic. That being said each one builds credibility to the possibility with logical reason that the original specimen may not just be a rock. And for reference I am open to it being a rock but why would I take a few opinions on a forum at 100% value. That would not be very smart. For reference these are not the only opinions I have had. That being stated it was left at interesting and should be looked at by an authenticator.

 

[monsterrack]

Jamus don't be offended by any comment that someone gives you on this site unless it is just straight out rude. Now that being said there are some very well know folks on this site that know more than just the normal collector. We may not always agree on a item but when all the votes are in and it is called a certain item then you can bank on it that they are right. I know you want your item to be what you say it is, but it just does not fit into what is the ID of a artifact. Then you have to look at how something would have been used, in the photo that you showed of the hammer stone with a face. By logic one would not make a tool used to hit other items a take the chance of breaking it and put a face on it and no offence but if I had $1 for everything that fit well in my hand made of rock by nature then I could solve the debt problem for the USA. I give you this challenge , show me a photo of another hammer stone found under a controlled dig with a face and it being a hand held item. Then I would say maybe so, it could be something. But after being on a great number of digs, studying artifacts for 40+ years along with the folks on this site like myself that have done way more in the artifact world than I, I just don't see it. There is an old saying (if you fool the eye, you fool the brain) when I first got started I brought home all types of stone's thinking they were an artifact but it was just a rock with some natural marks. Good Luck in your search.

 

[The Grim Reaper]

Jamus, you really need to listen to these people that are telling you that first piece is not an artifact. You have had several guys with 40 to 50 years of collecting and hunting experience tell you it's a natural creek battered stone and I have 50+ years of experience and I agree with them 100%.

 

[rock]

Can we see more of the ax like all sides? Maybe with a ruler showing the size. I will let the others talk to you about the other stone pieces.