Lincoln City OR, Cascade head Pirate treasure, Carnelian Crystal Skull

[Treasure_Hunter]

natural inclusions with the same ancient type polish, and painted/ dyed surfaces.

Sorry, the polish was caused by the ocean, not man, and there is no painted or dyed surfaces.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Agony and Death on a Gold Rush Steamer: The Disastrous Sinking of the Side-Wheeler Yankee Blade - Grab it through Amazon!

[Treasure_Hunter]

I get it, I understand what you think is happening here. I understand how obscure these photos look, but dismissing it as pareidolia just because your mind does not see the details or put the whole together is irresponsible and sad because it is discouraging to true investigation, a possiblity ok? but definitive without proper examination.... NO. That diagnosis is subject to the same subconscious programing.


here is an ancient polished stone. see how it has the similar crevices and scratches,

You are talking about inclusions and scratches made by nature, not man.

This is the kind of work Romans did when they wanted art on stones in rings, not random scratches.....

 

[traveller777]

Hello, this is my first post here and well long overdue as I have had this artifact for sometime but has been somewhat of a mystery to me, Years ago I tried to get more information about it and failed, set it aside and going to try again today. Here is the story starting in the late 80's- early 90's

At Cascade head in Lincoln City Oregon, there is a cave (well it has since collapsed in since my childhood) which was fabled to me as a pirate cave. What fun it was to go to our favorite beach every year and also have the mystery of pirates. On low tides we could walk across the rocks to get to it. Along with looking at sea life we also picked up agates along the beach and collected them and put them in a jar.

We eventually moved away from Oregon and several years later I found the jar and started to go through them and inspect all the cool agates and other tid bits we found. I started to go through them and well to my astonishment one was quite different. It was not so rough and odd shaped, it was smooth, and symmetrical, I then identified it as a crude skull shape that looked to be cut near the jaw and polished to form the bulb of the back of the head! I began to look closely at its swirls and to even more astonishment saw depictions of pirates! They have since faded a little but I think are still showing. I have no idea what technique could have done this. and I think it is more likely carnelian than agate. Its ironic as a kid dreaming of finding treasure there and then many years later discovering we did.

My theory is that this was a form of pirate art that they would create in off times and use for trading. I have never seen anything like it. The legend goes of a 8ft African skeleton found and native legends of a winged canoe. I wonder if it could have also been part of Sir Francis Drakes expedition or just a west coast pirate, I really do not know much about all that happened there. https://beachconnection.net/news/skelet021914_809.php

So here it is! Starting with the right cheek, We have the captain, with a long brimmed had and long black beard. it seems the scratch lines up with the hat so it might be a clue how this process was done but its not like that on every depiction. Behind him is a Ghost with long beard and dreads. The 3 circles that were his eyes and mouth had disintegrated sinceI first discovered it but I think enough remains. It could have been picked up anywhere on the beach about a mile from the site or in the cove where the cave once was. unfortunately this may have been in the sea water eroding for a couple hundred years and in the hands of a know nothing teenager.

View attachment 1999104

a better view of the captain View attachment 1999112

The Left Cheek, Much of it I could never tell what it was, but I drew on the face from what I first saw discovering this as a teenager, the face was blue, and the man had a white beard, he was holding a torch, and in the back ground another arm was reaching up to light his torch with it. all the stuff to the right I could never tell what it was.


View attachment 1999108

a closer view of the 2 torches
View attachment 1999111

the back view, at first I could not tell what it was, now its like the most identifiable evil looking skull n crossbones with very pointy cheeks and triangular eyes and double pointed chin.

View attachment 1999113

Top view, to show the symmetrical shape, and the bulge of the back part of the skull, narrowing to the faceView attachment 1999114

3/4 view, and back lit to show possibly how it was dyed or painted. View attachment 1999116

I guess I forgot to take pics of the bottom, but there is not much to look at other than a crude jaw line, with a few scratches on it. I may be able to get those later if interest abounds to show how it might have been worked.


I want to know what it may be worth, and how does one go about selling something like this?

Thanks for the interest!

It appears no one is going to be able to give you the information you want on this site. Maybe they can help you at a museum. Here is the link to a maritime museum on the west coast that has pirate information. I think there are several in the USA. If you just do a search they should come up. Or if you think it warrants the expert review, maybe contact the Smithsonian. A friend of mine dealt with them before on Native American artifacts and he said they were helpful. Good luck.

Pirate Adventure at the Maritime Museum | Poulsbo Historical Society & Museum

poulsbohistory.com

 

[LincolnCityFinder]

thank you traeller777. I will give them a contact and direct them to this page so they can see my presentation and the scoffers.

Things people are not adressing: the level of polish is not found on natural stones. They are rough in shape, or have more of a milky texture on the outer edges.

the images are only on the outside not inner banding. the inside is relatively clear, yet opaque paint or dyes are found all on the edges. not consistent with other agates.

I am not saying they were trying to carve in a relief... but possibly use pits and scatches as a way to inlay paint for better adherence. they may just be natural scars that they then used as part of design elements. and these were not ancient romans, but the same surface quality is found on other ancient polished stones.

 

[traveller777]

thank you traeller777. I will give them a contact and direct them to this page so they can see my presentation and the scoffers.

Things people are not adressing: the level of polish is not found on natural stones. They are rough in shape, or have more of a milky texture on the outer edges.

the images are only on the outside not inner banding. the inside is relatively clear, yet opaque paint or dyes are found all on the edges. not consistent with other agates.

I am not saying they were trying to carve in a relief... but possibly use pits and scatches as a way to inlay paint for better adherence. they may just be natural scars that they then used as part of design elements. and these were not ancient romans, but the same surface quality is found on other ancient polished stones.

Let us know what the museum has to say please.

 

[newnan man]

thank you traeller777. I will give them a contact and direct them to this page so they can see my presentation and the scoffers.

Things people are not adressing: the level of polish is not found on natural stones. They are rough in shape, or have more of a milky texture on the outer edges.

the images are only on the outside not inner banding. the inside is relatively clear, yet opaque paint or dyes are found all on the edges. not consistent with other agates.

I am not saying they were trying to carve in a relief... but possibly use pits and scatches as a way to inlay paint for better adherence. they may just be natural scars that they then used as part of design elements.

My brother lived in Portla

thank you traeller777. I will give them a contact and direct them to this page so they can see my presentation and the scoffers.

Things people are not adressing: the level of polish is not found on natural stones. They are rough in shape, or have more of a milky texture on the outer edges.

the images are only on the outside not inner banding. the inside is relatively clear, yet opaque paint or dyes are found all on the edges. not consistent with other agates.

I am not saying they were trying to carve in a relief... but possibly use pits and scatches as a way to inlay paint for better adherence. they may just be natural scars that they then used as part of design elements. and these were not ancient romans, but the same surface quality is found on other ancient polished stones.

You state in your above

thank you traeller777. I will give them a contact and direct them to this page so they can see my presentation and the scoffers.

Things people are not adressing: the level of polish is not found on natural stones. They are rough in shape, or have more of a milky texture on the outer edges.

the images are only on the outside not inner banding. the inside is relatively clear, yet opaque paint or dyes are found all on the edges. not consistent with other agates.

I am not saying they were trying to carve in a relief... but possibly use pits and scatches as a way to inlay paint for better adherence. they may just be natural scars that they then used as part of design elements. and these were not ancient romans, but the same surface quality is found on other ancient polished stones.

Who are the "scoffers"? A scoffer is someone who mocks, belittles, or makes fun of someone in a derisive way. No one who responded to you did that.. You asked for opinions then proceeded to argue with individuals who obviously have experience in these things. Everyone was polite and attempted to present their points clearly and intelligently. That was a rude remark.

 

[LincolnCityFinder]

Its some subtle stuff in a passive way but there are the comments that I find to be belittling. People are not taking me seriously nor credibly and not providing any evidence for their conclusions. Sorry if it was the wrong word, maybe a little harsh, but not entirely. I do thank all the serious comments on here


"Crash, this thread is the perfect example of the L. C. Baker thread." --- I don't know the reference and seems to be some kind of inside joke.

"You drew the pictures on the rocks using your imagination of what you think is there." -- accusing me of lying, or being an idiot and not realizing a difference between my imagination and art, not listening to the part about the degradation that they were once much more clear. It would be like having a paleolithic rock wall painting and thinking it was just some random residue from a lichen or moss that once grew on it.

"sorry, the stock photos do not show what your drawings show, stock photos show natural swirls and impurities in the stone caused by mother nature.."

No one is producing natural agate picutes from the earth that have the same type round form, high polish, and images on outside. They are not swirls, (this stone has almost no banding on the inside except some varying degrees of orange and bright orange that are really hard to see at all) the inside is relatively pure. zoom into the cracks of some of these and can see the white pigment is in the cracks on the outer surface only. none of any examples I can find match my stone. Sea tumbles agates are irregular shaped, and have a cloudy polish on the ridges. Mother nature would have the white pigment areas banded within and a light would show through them as bands.

Cheese sandwich, image is natural, not man made."

Comparing my discovery to a cheese sandwich. makes me look and feel like an idiot to others for trying to defend my discovery. Yet lets also lets talk about the possibility of an artist making an image in a cheese sandwich with a match or pen blow torch by selectively burning/ toasting it. would be very possible!

"In psychology we have the Rorschach test or RANDOM ink blot test and ask patients what they see in the random array of blots. The patients response reveals something about them. In your case, it seems natural that you would see a pirate or pirate items like skull and cross-bones given your history of the pirate cave."

It would be like saying, oh that triagngular looking stone cant be an arrowhead because its near a native american settlement and that would be too obvious, or that pecking rock is just a rock, that bone awl is just a splinter that just got chewed up by an animal.


"There are over 2500 years of knowledge and experience here. As long as you continue to think and look for these kinds of rocks you will never find true artifacts."

its a strawman agrument of I have more experience thus I am right even though I have not physically done any test or seen the object. its diminutive, and there is no way to quantify that experience and its relevance. People treasure hunting with a metal detector will not find objects like this. It also suggest I have no experience or knowledge of some things.

here is another dimunitive statement about be never finding true artifacts... assuming I am looking for artifacts as painted stones. I was not and do not.... I do have other stones I might collect for such reasons, but I know what they are, anamolies and natural so I just have them as fun things, like a stone in the shape of a heart, or another stone with a triangular coloring, and other interesting pieces of drift wood. I am not a treasure hunter, I just happened to discover I found some by accident, and even unknown for many years.

"Sorry, the polish was caused by the ocean, not man, and there is no painted or dyed surfaces." proof? I have images of rough stones from the ocean, and they do not have surface anomalies like this one. again the polish is shiny when wet, and any coloring is not just on the surface.

I have asked people what would it take to show it had workmanship, and no one explains an answer but just says what it is not... yet worked stones share characteristics of mine, as to form and polish and left over natural scratches. agate is a dyable stone so if thick pigments were used to dye the stone it would seem that over time they would migrate creating a more blurry effect. Also showing the possibility of pressure flaking on the underside. which can even be done with even soft tools if a good bite in the material can be made. ocean polish does not create the same effect its much more cloudy and has to be wet to make it look shiny, mine shines dry, it was the polish that made the stone stand out among the others in the first place.



Really thank you as I said I am sorry I have been getting frusterated, but I have experience with this stone people are just not understanding and keeping saying its imagination is not helping. Show me real natural agates with these characteristics.

Everything about its construction is possible in the realm of shaping it, polishing it, getting pigments to dye within this type of stone. Its likely 100's of years old and been degraded by ocean sands and human oily hands.

what is not typical is the symetrical (and stylized skull shape) and smoothed out shape, high polish, images/ pigmented areas on outside only. and inward sharp angled notched area (for the jaw line)

 

[crashbandicoot]

Well,I tell you what you do! Have your things identified and confirmed by a genuine sure enough expert geologist and historian,then come back here and prove everybody wrong.I,ll be the first to congratulate you.Until then.as everyone here has said,they,re rocks,pretty rocks,but rocks.Challenge issued.Your move!

 

[Tdog]

This is another ridiculous attempt to convince educated rock hounds that a natural rock has been altered by human hands. I've seen it for many years on these online message boards and in person. Pareidolia is, in fact, what it is and that's ALL! Trying to save face is not a good reason to keep digging your hole deeper and deeper and finally bury yourself in it. Wake up man and you may learn something. Put all those pretty rocks you've found in a tumbler and shine 'em up. Maybe then they can be used as settings in cheap costume jewelry.

Edit: I recommend moving this to the geofact forum.

 

[LonesomeRog]

Hello, this is my first post here and well long overdue as I have had this artifact for sometime but has been somewhat of a mystery to me, Years ago I tried to get more information about it and failed, set it aside and going to try again today. Here is the story starting in the late 80's- early 90's

At Cascade head in Lincoln City Oregon, there is a cave (well it has since collapsed in since my childhood) which was fabled to me as a pirate cave. What fun it was to go to our favorite beach every year and also have the mystery of pirates. On low tides we could walk across the rocks to get to it. Along with looking at sea life we also picked up agates along the beach and collected them and put them in a jar.

We eventually moved away from Oregon and several years later I found the jar and started to go through them and inspect all the cool agates and other tid bits we found. I started to go through them and well to my astonishment one was quite different. It was not so rough and odd shaped, it was smooth, and symmetrical, I then identified it as a crude skull shape that looked to be cut near the jaw and polished to form the bulb of the back of the head! I began to look closely at its swirls and to even more astonishment saw depictions of pirates! They have since faded a little but I think are still showing. I have no idea what technique could have done this. and I think it is more likely carnelian than agate. Its ironic as a kid dreaming of finding treasure there and then many years later discovering we did.

My theory is that this was a form of pirate art that they would create in off times and use for trading. I have never seen anything like it. The legend goes of a 8ft African skeleton found and native legends of a winged canoe. I wonder if it could have also been part of Sir Francis Drakes expedition or just a west coast pirate, I really do not know much about all that happened there. https://beachconnection.net/news/skelet021914_809.php

So here it is! Starting with the right cheek, We have the captain, with a long brimmed had and long black beard. it seems the scratch lines up with the hat so it might be a clue how this process was done but its not like that on every depiction. Behind him is a Ghost with long beard and dreads. The 3 circles that were his eyes and mouth had disintegrated sinceI first discovered it but I think enough remains. It could have been picked up anywhere on the beach about a mile from the site or in the cove where the cave once was. unfortunately this may have been in the sea water eroding for a couple hundred years and in the hands of a know nothing teenager.

View attachment 1999104

a better view of the captain View attachment 1999112

The Left Cheek, Much of it I could never tell what it was, but I drew on the face from what I first saw discovering this as a teenager, the face was blue, and the man had a white beard, he was holding a torch, and in the back ground another arm was reaching up to light his torch with it. all the stuff to the right I could never tell what it was.


View attachment 1999108

a closer view of the 2 torches
View attachment 1999111

the back view, at first I could not tell what it was, now its like the most identifiable evil looking skull n crossbones with very pointy cheeks and triangular eyes and double pointed chin.

View attachment 1999113

Top view, to show the symmetrical shape, and the bulge of the back part of the skull, narrowing to the faceView attachment 1999114

3/4 view, and back lit to show possibly how it was dyed or painted. View attachment 1999116

I guess I forgot to take pics of the bottom, but there is not much to look at other than a crude jaw line, with a few scratches on it. I may be able to get those later if interest abounds to show how it might have been worked.


I want to know what it may be worth, and how does one go about selling something like this?

Thanks for the interest!

I know I’m really late to the party here, but here goes, anyway.

Boy, not to annoy you, but try as I might, I just do not see what you’re saying you see in your rocks. I know you believe what you think you see, but this reminds me of a late friend of mine, who believed a large, strange, isolated boulder on a piece of property he owned, was a meteorite. He consulted with a number of geologists, and even with NASA about it. It’s been a number of years ago now, and I’m not absolutely sure if he ever received a real consensus from the experts on his belief.

One thing I do remember is that under significant magnification, he believed he saw little figures of angels. And Chuck was fully convinced and adamant that he was right, and that the angels were really there.

I’m not saying any of this facetiously, and definitely not trying to make a point to embarrass you. Chuck really believed it, and who was I to doubt him. And according to him, NASA was trying to lure him into a career change, and go to work for the space agency. And again, who was I to doubt him.

He had two objectives with all of these experts, 1) To ascertain whether they agreed with him that the mother rock was indeed a meteorite, which, if memory serves me, he did obtain pretty strong agreement that it was, or at least he believed he had.

Secondly, he really sought to obtain confirmation of the small angel figures in the smaller, broken off pieces of the parent rock. This I’m not as certain he was able to get consensus about. And I should mention, that he believed God put the figures there as a testimony of his existence, to the scientific community. I would seriously doubt that he was successful in this aspect, although I do remember him talking about a few of the geologists that he believed came to faith, or at least had their childhood faith rekindled.

At any rate, sorry for the big, long post, but my point is that I could not see what Chuck saw in his rock samples, and unfortunately, I cannot see what you’re seeing in yours. I truly wish I could, though.

The other fellow, who posted the word meaning your mind is convincing you of something you think you see, makes more sense to me. I also feel like he was truly trying to make his point to you without being disrespectful. I noticed you seemed to take great offense to that, but I felt like he was just trying to gently inform you. I think as humans we all have our foibles, and Lord knows MY wife and daughters think I’m a fool much of the time.

Anyway, keep hunting those rocks, and if you ever discover definitively that you’re right about your agates please report back to us. Take care.

 

[LonesomeRog]

This is another ridiculous attempt to convince educated rock hounds that a natural rock has been altered by human hands. I've seen it for many years on these online message boards and in person. Pareidolia is, in fact, what it is and that's ALL! Trying to save face is not a good reason to keep digging your hole deeper and deeper and finally bury yourself in it. Wake up man and you may learn something. Put all those pretty rocks you've found in a tumbler and shine 'em up. Maybe then they can be used as settings in cheap costume jewelry.

Edit: I recommend moving this to the geofact forum.

Be kind, man. I always think of the saying, “there but for the grace of God go I.”