🔎 UNIDENTIFIED Natural formation or Carved Animal in Sandstone

sandfisher1

Jr. Member
Nov 5, 2015
52
28
Texas
Detector(s) used
White's TreasurePro,Whites Eagle Spectrum
Primary Interest:
All Treasure Hunting

Attachments

  • 20250114_222546.jpg
    20250114_222546.jpg
    751.7 KB · Views: 33
  • 20250114_222604.jpg
    20250114_222604.jpg
    639 KB · Views: 24
  • 20250114_222536.jpg
    20250114_222536.jpg
    666.6 KB · Views: 24
  • 20250114_222556.jpg
    20250114_222556.jpg
    561.3 KB · Views: 24
While I don't see it, you have a neat find. Looking forward to other opinions!
 

Upvote 2
Carving marks...anywhere?
 

Upvote 1
Sorry, it is natural, no signs on it of being worked by man.
 

Upvote 2
the fact that its surface (back side too I am assuming) has a uniform, not patina, but "crust", is the give away here. That and the fact that were it native made you wouldn't have to guess and it would be obvious to EVERYONE.
 

Upvote 0
the fact that its surface (back side too I am assuming) has a uniform, not patina, but "crust", is the give away here. That and the fact that were it native made you wouldn't have to guess and it would be obvious to EVERYONE.
maybe obvious to you BUT not to everyone. Guessing is part of discovery at times and, IMO, wear could take away details or sharpness of an object.
I never said it was native made (hinted) but if it were native made doesn't mean it was a great artist. Could have been a child, beginner or a sloppy or bad artist. Not all native artists were a Picasso.
Or could have a certain amount of erosion.
Sum it up: I disagree with you.
A lot of finds in the field are not always obvious.

sandfisher1
 

Upvote 0

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top