Stratford Hall On Potomac Ids Needed

[KYAL]

I would appreciate help with identifying a few things from this trip. First this hollow bone. Also does that look like a predation mark in the second photo?

[Troodon]

Looks like a horizontal spine of a vertebra. Could be from a porpoise.

[KYAL]

Next, several shark teeth. I believe the 4th one in second row to be tiger shark but uncertain about others. In the second photo are two bi-concave objects. I assume them to be vertebrae but not sure. The first smaller one is completely smooth around edge. If I found it in the local Ordivician I would think it were a crinoid stem segment. I can rephotograph anything for clearer shots if necessary.

Thank you for looking and for any help.

[Troodon]

Top row from left first two Tiger shark, Physogaleus contortus then last two Snaggletooth Shark, Hemipristis Serra

Second row first two Snaggletooth shark, cannot make out next one too dark. Far right tiger shark Galeocerdo aduncus

Bottom row first two Snaggletooth shark, smaller four teeth to right are Grey Sharks

Forgot

Second image item on left I think is shark vert if it was found with the teeth. A side view would help. Not sure on the other item more images can help.

Edited September 11, 2014 by Troodon

[MarcoSr]

The first smaller one is completely smooth around edge. If I found it in the local Ordivician I would think it were a crinoid stem segment. I can rephotograph anything for clearer shots if necessary.

I would also like to see a side view of the first smaller item and straight down shots of both faces. It doesn't look like a vertebra because it doesn't look concave. It looks more like a fragment of an infilled burrow or possibly a Native American clay bead.

Marco Sr.

[tmaier]

I would also like to see a side view of the first smaller item and straight down shots of both faces. It doesn't look like a vertebra because it doesn't look concave. It looks more like a fragment of an infilled burrow or possibly a Native American clay bead.

It has concentric layers and a smooth outer edge. I've never seen anything like that before.

[KYAL]

Here are shots of the small round object: both sides and edge.

[squali]

Nice finds. At 1/4" in diameter with what appears to be a worn hole in the center Its either a clay bead as Marco said or I don't know what.

[tmaier]

I can't think of any indian manufacturing methods that would create that layering effect. They would often work natural objects into beads, though, so it might be a natural object that has been worked into a bead.

[Troodon]

Definitly a clay bead on the side shot.

[KYAL]

Here are views of both sides and edge of the other "vertebra" object. Any thoughts?

[KYAL]

Troodon - Many thanks for the tooth IDs. Here are pictures of both sides of the tooth you said was too dark. Can you do an ID on it??

[KYAL]

Thanks to those weighing in on the "bead". If true that is a cooler artifact than I anticipated

[Auspex]

Thanks to those weighing in on the "bead". If true that is a cooler artifact than I anticipated

My reservation about it being a bead is that the hole is not drilled, but appears to be naturally occurring.

[squali]

Good point Auspex, but I think this would of been made from a rolled out clay 'thread' and then cut and poked before curing.

On the other hand I've seen a heck of a lot of strange rocks.

Kyal maybe repost it in the Artifacts section

[Troodon]

Troodon - Many thanks for the tooth IDs. Here are pictures of both sides of the tooth you said was too dark. Can you do an ID on it??

Its an extremely worn tooth. Too much for me to give an accurate call. See if others want to take a shot at it.

[ynot]

Hey all,

Just wondered if anyone had noticed the similarity between the "bead" and the other piece shown?

I think they may be some type of worn down concretion or maybe a mold/algae around something organic. Just a guess.

Tony

Edited September 11, 2014 by ynot

[Auspex]

Hey all,

Just wondered if anyone had noticed the similarity between the "bead" and the other piece shown?

I think they may be some type of worn down concretion or maybe a mold/algae around something organic. Just a guess.

Tony

I agree. It could be a section of a concretionary root-cast (common enough in that formation), where a root passed through a discrete layer.

[Harry Pristis]

The 'hollow bone' is interesting. I can't say with absolute certainty, but, there's a good chance it is antler from a white-tail deer. I say that because I think it shows human alteration . . . that is, it's an artifact.

The single, diagonal scar looks to me to be a cut mark, likely with a stone tool. On the broad end of the bone, note the 'score and snap' technique for separating this bit of antler from the larger portion . . . one side is straight and smooth, while the other side is ragged.

This tool would have been used as a handle for a compound tool. A bit -- a chert blade or a bone perforator -- would have been mounted in the recess in the cancellous bone.

This is not an uncommon tool, though it easily may be overlooked. Here are a couple of similar antler tools from Florida:

http://www.thefossilforum.com/index,php?/gallery/image/5141-deer-antler-tools/

(I've had a good bit of trouble with this post, including the hyperlink. If the hyperlink doesn't work for you, you can see the antler tools in my 'Line-Drawings & Artifacts album in the Gallery.)

Edited September 11, 2014 by Harry Pristis

[KYAL]

Harry - Thanks for pointing that out. It looks like a strong possibility.

[squali]

Thanks Harry. I took the liberty of posting your picture.

It seems the best fit by far.

Excellent Gallery. Thank you for contributing very informative images.

[MarcoSr]

My reservation about it being a bead is that the hole is not drilled, but appears to be naturally occurring.

The hole also does bother me as the beads that I see typically have uniform holes. However the Native Americans in the area did use Crinoid stems and other natural small objects with existing holes like pieces of concretions as beads without further modification.

Marco Sr.

[Harry Pristis]

If I were going to make clay disk beads, I would string them to dry on a twig or reed. They have to be completely dry before they can be fired. Sliding a wet clay bead down a twig or reed might produce irregularity of the perforation.

[KYAL]

Harry et al. - I have been thinking about the antler tine artifact for the last day or so and have come up with some questions. First, assuming the antler was cut when it was fresh, how long would it take to become fossilized? This would bear on the age of the artifact and of the people producing it. Second, the small tine end doesn't look like it would be very useful as a handle to anything. Then it occurred to me that it might have just been cut off the make the base part of the antler segment as the handle for some tool. Also, wondering why the other more diagonal cut? Third, I then looked at the one modern deer skull I have. Parts of the antler has been gnawed on by rodents so I can see the interior. Even towards the tips it looks pretty solid and not like the fossil that I found. Also the tines look much more rounded rather than flattened in cross-section. I suppose these factors might depend on the age of the deer. I welcome any ideas others may have.

[Harry Pristis]

Harry et al. - I have been thinking about the antler tine artifact for the last day or so and have come up with some questions.

First, assuming the antler was cut when it was fresh, how long would it take to become fossilized? This would bear on the age of the artifact and of the people producing it.

Second, the small tine end doesn't look like it would be very useful as a handle to anything. Then it occurred to me that it might have just been cut off the make the base part of the antler segment as the handle for some tool. Also, wondering why the other more diagonal cut?

Third, I then looked at the one modern deer skull I have. Parts of the antler has been gnawed on by rodents so I can see the interior. Even towards the tips it looks pretty solid and not like the fossil that I found. Also the tines look much more rounded rather than flattened in cross-section. I suppose these factors might depend on the age of the deer.

I welcome any ideas others may have.

First, all the cuts would have been made while the bone was 'green.' How long for the bone to become mineralized depends entirely on the conditions of deposition (protection from weathering, availability of groundwater, and availability of minerals).

Second, the presence of the diagonal cut may have been incidental, rather than function for the tool. For example, the user may have sliced a tendon using the antler-handled tool as an anvil. The presence of cut marks on this bone (antler is bone), functional or not, would make this an artifact. Cuts with a stone tool tend to produce multiple micro-tracks from a sawing motion; check your object under magnification.

Third, antlers are seasonal organs. They start their growth highly vascularized (in velvet). With time they reach their full extent and the bone fills in from the interior. Antlers achieve maximum density, then the blood supply is choked off. The antlers become dead bone, ready for combat in rutting. So, yes, deer of different ages will produce antlers of different size and conformation. But, also, different times within the antler cycle that the deer are harvested will produce antlers of differing density.