Mako Arrowhead/point?

[Hunt4teeth]

Hello,

I wanted to get fellow fossilers thoughts on a mako tooth I found in the Venice boneyard back in 2009 while doing a dive with Florida West Scuba. The mako tooth was broken and encrusted in coralline algae (see 1st pic below). It was my first tooth dive and at the time I was not familiar with coralline algae and did not realize it was a shark tooth. I grabbed it thinking it looked like an arrowhead. When I got back to the boat, Captain Steve asked what I found, and I told him I think I found an arrowhead. He gave me a funny look and asked to see it. He told me it was a mako tooth (Note: the tooth is broken/altered and still measures 2/12 inches), and seemed fairly certain it was manmade into an arrowhead. I even overheard him telling Marie (diving guide on the boat) he really wanted the tooth and she commented that he must have something in the shop he could trade for it. I posted a couple "no so good" pics on a scuba forum, but got some mixed reviews. So I decided to take a couple new pics to see what people here thought about the tooth possibly being made into an arrowhead or maybe a point. Thank you for your thoughts! F.Y.I. I wish I would of left the coralline algae on the tooth, it looked much "cooler" to me.

[Doctor Mud]

This tooth does superficially look like an arrow head and it makes sense that a fossil sharks tooth might provide a prefabricated arrowhead without having to make it from scratch from flint.

I guess the best way to prove this would be to look for tool marks under a dissecting microscope. There would hopefully be some evidence for shaping of the base or root end of the tooth. Did you use white vinegar to remove the algae?

[RickNC]

I don't think so. I've found many makos and great whites broken the exact same way.

[painshill]

From the pictures, I honestly don’t think I could say that it has been deliberately modified, although microscopic examination might tell a different story. Even if it had, I don’t think it could be reliably attributed to use as an arrowhead. Shark teeth (both fossil and extant) were used for a variety of purposes by many peoples in the Americas – especially in lithic-poor areas of the Caribbean. In Cuba for example, there are deposits of some very large megalodon teeth that were used as celts (axes) and knives and cutting implements, even up to relatively recent times.

The author Ernest Hemmingway (a long-term Cuban resident) had a short handled hatchet with big meg tooth used by a bartender at his local watering hole to open coconuts. Shark teeth were also used in fearsome multi-bladed clubs and more frequently as sickle/scythe blades for harvesting grasses and palm fronds to be used in basket-making. (Thanks to Joshua Ream for that info, and here’s a modified tooth he recovered from a shell midden that he assumes was trimmed to assist hafting):

In the Squier and Davis surveys of the Ohio mounds they noted that that some of the shark teeth found “have holes drilled through them near the base; others are notched, as if designed to form spear or arrow-heads. Raleigh observed some used as such among the Indians of Carolina.”

In “Integrated Geology, Palaeontology, and Archaeology: Native American Use of Fossil Shark teeth within the Chesapeake Bay Region” (Lowery, Godfrey & Eshelman), there is this:

“Fossil shark teeth were used by various prehistoric (pre-European) cultures in North America over the past 10,000 years. Archaeological data from the Chesapeake Bay region indicate that six different varieties of fossil shark teeth were collected, modified, and used by native cultures over the past 2,500 years….

The roots of these fossil teeth are variously modified, notched, or drilled. Although most were probably used as projectile points, knives, or scraping tools, intentionally drilled holes near the root areas on some fossil teeth indicate that a few were possibly used as ornaments, for religious purposes, or as curios. A brief synthesis of the geology, paleontology, and archaeology suggests that the Chesapeake Bay region may have served as the source area for some of the fossil shark teeth documented at archaeological sites in the Ohio Valley. However, the range of fossil shark species recorded in Ohio and along the Potomac River suggests only a few species were being selectively traded.”

Here’s a couple of illustrations from that paper. The modifications can be subtle:

… or more distinctive (possible arrowhead top right):

There are also some nice illustrations of modified shark teeth from Florida sites here:

http://www.peachstatearchaeologicalsociety.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=238%3AShark-Teeth&catid=&Itemid=58

The author generically uses the term “blades”, reflecting the difficulty of assigning them to projectile point, knife, drill, or other tool… even if it’s possible to conclude that the modification was intended to assist in hafting, as opposed to suspension as an ornament.

Also some cool stuff here:

http://lithiccastinglab.com/gallery-pages/2004augustsharksteethpage1.htm

Edited November 8, 2013 by painshill

[RichW9090]

People do all sorts of idiosyncratic, "one-off" kinds of things, and trying to haft a sharks tooth might well have been attempted. But absent any definitive wear patterns on the enamel, I doubt we'd ever be able to prove such a use, unless one were found actually hafted in one of the shell middens that preserves organic materials, like those of Key Marco in Florida, or in a dry cave site.

I think itis fair to say that no culture of which we were aware customarily used shark's teeth as projectile points. They are just too rare to have been a cultural norm.

I am reminded of the Savitch Farm Site near Marlton, New Jersey, where we found one or two hearth features containing pieces of the light-colored fossil wood from the nearby Cohansey Formation, as if the inhabitants had tried to burn the wood. With only these few examples, do we assume some sort of ritual/ceremonial association between the hearths and the fossil wood, or do we just chalk it up to someone who found some of the wood while wandering around, and said to himself "Hey, this looks like wood - I wonder if it burns?" and tried to do so, only to be laughed out of his tepee by the rest of the guys, or told by his wife to get the heck out of camp and find some meat?

Rich

[Hunt4teeth]

Thank you for taking the time to look at my post and leave your comments. Ever since I found the tooth, I have been fascinated with the idea of using shark teeth as points, knives, scrapers, axes, etc.... I have even noticed modified teeth at the various fossil shows and museums I have visited in Florida and North Carolina.

Although when I found the tooth, I thought it was an arrowhead, I would have envision it being used as a point to spear fish (because of where it was found and it seems like a good use for a giant mako tooth). I too, have my doubts about whether it was modified or just broken that way. There are two things that make me think it could have been modified as opposed to broken (1) the two corners where the blade and root come together looks to be almost a perfect 45 degree angle (one of the corners has broken off, but originally looks to have the 45 degree angle), which seems odd that it would break that way (2) the "display side" of the root is missing (gouged out), this long with the missing root lobes, forms a square flat post (refer to pictures 4 and 5), which could be utilized for hafting. I will try to view under a microscope for any evidence of tool marks. But I agree with Rich and painshill, unless it was found hafted in shell middens, it would be difficult to prove. A special thanks to painshill, his post was very informative and contained some great resources related to the topic.

Doctor Mud: Sorry for the late reply, but I used a mixture of 50% apple cider vinegar and 50% water to remove the coralline algae. Would this affect the ability to see tool markings under a microscope?

[RichW9090]

Yes, the Native Americans certainly did have a fascination with shark teeth, and hence likely with sharks. I excavated a burial on Tiburon Island in the Gulf of California many years ago which had a couple dozen shark teeth in it, later identified by Bob Purdy as coming from 4 different species of shark.

A, C, E, F, G, I, J, N, O, P are Galocerdo cuvieri, the Tiger Shark.

B, D, H, M, Q are Carcharhinus leucas or C. obscurus, the Bull Shark or the Dusky Shark

K is Carcharhinus brachyurus, the Copper Shark

R is Isurus paucus, the Longfin Mako Shark

Edited November 10, 2013 by RichW9090

[Hunt4teeth]

Thank you for the post Rich. I'm glad to know I'm not the only one fascinated/boderline obsessed with sharks and shark teeth. Now only if I can convince my wife I'm not alone.