Jump to content

Crocodile Skull Fossil


Crazyhen

Recommended Posts

Hi, unfortunately, I don't think that that is a crocodilian, but just a coincidentally shaped rock. The material to me seems to be more like pure stone rather than bone material, and the shape doesn't seem to be symmetrical. Also, I think that the "lower jaw"'s symphysis is too thick (alternatively, the "hole" on the lower jaw is too small and does not reach the end of the jaw)(Did I say that wrong?), which is a red flag. The skull's shape also appears to be too flat, as seen on the last picture.

 

Of course, don't take only my word as a non-expert for it, instead remember to hear what others and actual experts have to say as well.

 

Happy Hunting! :hammer01:

If you're a fossil nut from Palos Verdes, San Pedro, Redondo Beach, or Torrance, feel free to shoot me a PM!

 

 

Mosasaurus_hoffmannii_skull_schematic.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Macrophyseter said:

Hi, unfortunately, I don't think that that is a crocodilian, but just a coincidentally shaped rock. ...

 

Of course, don't take only my word as a non-expert for it, instead remember to hear what others and actual experts have to say as well.

 

Happy Hunting! :hammer01:

 

That's what I also wanted to say when I first saw this picture, but the strange structure on the left side (last picture) made me think.

Croc.JPG.9ec5caac3015575fce3cbde17130ad03.JPG

 

This would be a typical bone structure for a croc.. Same groove structure I can see on my 2 meter Diplocynodon from Messel (not the small one from my Avatar).   Could it be a croc skull heavily encrusted with something else?

The lower yaw (or what ever it is) seems to be broken. Can we get a photo of the cross section?

Thomas

Be not ashamed of mistakes and thus make them crimes (Confucius, 551 BC - 479 BC).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That texture is throwing me off as well but I also have some concerns with the piece:

-The orbitals are really unusually slit-like and don't sit well. They should be wider.

-The cranial platform is missing and the skull should end immediately after where it should have been. It doesn't, and the lack of anything reminiscent of a basioccipital bone on top of the odd extension of the skull where it shouldn't makes for what would have been an odd attachment for the neck (if it is real). Furthermore, croc skull are not rounded at the back and the bone doesn't "cup" down. They're triangular.

-No sign of the nasal fenestrae

-There's a lot of unusual assymmetry taking place. Apart from the shape of the skull and unusual outgrowths on what would have been the jaw if real, what really sticks out is what again would have been the orbitals. They're at an angle to each other when you look at the ventral side of the 'skull'.

-The lower jaw does NOT have that connecting link posteriorly

I've attached some images of one of my crocodile skulls below to hopefully highlight what I mean:

Screenshot_20171128-135832.jpg

Screenshot_20171128-135849.jpg

20170909_210751.jpg

"Let us therefore follow after the things which make for peace, and things wherewith one may edify another."
-Romans 14:19

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jesuslover340 said:

That texture is throwing me off as well but I also have some concerns with the piece:

-The orbitals are really unusually slit-like and don't sit well. They should be wider.

-The cranial platform is missing and the skull should end immediately after where it should have been. It doesn't, and the lack of anything reminiscent of a basioccipital bone on top of the odd extension of the skull where it shouldn't makes for what would have been an odd attachment for the neck (if it is real). Furthermore, croc skull are not rounded at the back and the bone doesn't "cup" down. They're triangular.

-No sign of the nasal fenestrae

-There's a lot of unusual assymmetry taking place. Apart from the shape of the skull and unusual outgrowths on what would have been the jaw if real, what really sticks out is what again would have been the orbitals. They're at an angle to each other when you look at the ventral side of the 'skull'.

-The lower jaw does NOT have that connecting link posteriorly

I've attached some images of one of my crocodile skulls below to hopefully highlight what I mean:

Screenshot_20171128-135832.jpg

Screenshot_20171128-135849.jpg

20170909_210751.jpg

Thanks for your comments.  Could the strange forms be a result that the fossil has not been cleaned/prepared?  Or if it's not a crocodile skull, could it be the skull of some kind of reptile?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It might be an archosaur skull that has experienced tectonic deformation.

And am I basing that on anything other than the more or less symmetrical disposition of what might be the orbits?:P

The corrugations/the ornament that Thomas (OILSHALE)is talking about..

Wahl/Massare as a sort of pointer

fernariistlanthc.jpg

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd love more photos of the nasal region and anywhere the looks like bone showing from the encrusted bits. There's a few spots that make me scratch the ol noggin

"Faith is to believe what you do not see; the reward of this faith is to see what you believe" - Saint Augustine

"Those who can not see past their own nose deserve our pity more than anything else."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You might have to retrodeform it,as has been done for e.g. ankylosaurs

Greetings ,Strayan:P

I always wonder if the one disposing of fossils like these has knowledge of what the Mesozoic of Madagascar means for systematic/biogeographic

stratigraphic/ tectonic studies.

****of course it's a stem archosaur ,I swear on my mother-in-law's life it is****** 

 

farsnaeriistlanthc.jpg

farsnaeriistlanthc.jpg

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not vouching for or against it being croc just yet, just simply pointing out what I do and don't see. All I can say is that if it is fossil, it definitely has a lot of encrustation or alteration, whether geologic or man-made. It looks too similar to be able to rule it as being purely geological, but it looks too geologic/encrusted to confirm with certainty it being an actual crocodile fossil. I see the pitting/corrugation texture in areas it shouldn't be, such as where the nasal fenestrae should go and behind where the cranial platform would have gone where there should not even be bone, but alas, without further photos, I can only run around in circles :wacko:

"Let us therefore follow after the things which make for peace, and things wherewith one may edify another."
-Romans 14:19

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't own this piece.  A shop owner in China sent me some photos of this piece.  I attach a few more photos for you to take a look.

IMG_8563.JPG

JPOY6109.JPG

KMQO1678.JPG

NEVM8575.JPG

OJUQ7958.JPG

OWRU3757.JPG

PQNY2254.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those look like scute impressions in matrix. You don't suppose it's a natural cast of the skull made after a scavenger removed the bones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's definitely something more than a suggestively shaped rock. Options are either a skull which needs prep, a skull which has been heavily restored, or a fake. There's a skull like it in my local museum, but I can't find it online. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’ll throw my opinion in, i think it’s a fake. Might even be a cast.

“...whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been and are being evolved.” ~ Charles Darwin

Happy hunting,

Mason

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, WhodamanHD said:

I’ll throw my opinion in, i think it’s a fake. Might even be a cast.

Think I agree here. Whilst the scute impressions look genuine enough (which could be done by using real scutes to make such impressions), they shouldn't be where the nasal openings should go. And I think that is what threw us for a loop. Seeing more photos now, the impressions look real enough but everything else is off, implying the texture/pattern was man-made. My question is why spend the time making such a bad fake? Usually fakes mimic pristine specimens...

"Let us therefore follow after the things which make for peace, and things wherewith one may edify another."
-Romans 14:19

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Jesuslover340 said:

Think I agree here. Whilst the scute impressions look genuine enough (which could be done by using real scutes to make such impressions), they shouldn't be where the nasal openings should go. And I think that is what threw us for a loop. Seeing more photos now, the impressions look real enough but everything else is off, implying the texture/pattern was man-made. My question is why spend the time making such a bad fake? Usually fakes mimic pristine specimens...

Maybe because they don’t think consumers will notice.

“...whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been and are being evolved.” ~ Charles Darwin

Happy hunting,

Mason

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, WhodamanHD said:

Maybe because they don’t think consumers will notice.

If it is a fake (I think it is but have no expertise in this area) and our highly experienced members are not sure then it would be easy to con less experienced buyers...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm with Jesuslover and Westcoast on this:not real.

The total lack of provenance info,etc,is also disconcerting and ....

all kinda dodgy

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to crazyhen, this "fossil" (if it is a fossil) comes from Madagascar. We are mainly comparing this "fossil" with croc- and alligators skulls - so with critters from the Cretaceous or from the Paleogene. These skulls don't really fit - I think we can almost rule out croc or alligator. 

But it could be much older. Madagascar is known for its Triassic sediments - comparing the skull with that of a phytosaur or an archeosaur skull might be more appropriate.

They do have quite strange croc like skulls. 

Just a thought - I don't have the knowledge to do that.

image.jpeg.4c82bbce294990419ab90e5755219ac2.jpeg

A phytosaur skull from the Triassic, Petrified Forest National Park

Be not ashamed of mistakes and thus make them crimes (Confucius, 551 BC - 479 BC).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I made the comment under your vertebra post but without knowing the provenance, age of these fossils from Madagascar it's very difficult to diagnose your specimens.   Real or fake I would pass just because these are total unknowns.  There are many other fossils out there to purchase that are understood. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Troodon said:

I made the comment under your vertebra post but without knowing the provenance, age of these fossils from Madagascar it's very difficult to diagnose your specimens.   Real or fake I would pass just because these are total unknowns.  There are many other fossils out there to purchase that are understood. 

^^^

"Let us therefore follow after the things which make for peace, and things wherewith one may edify another."
-Romans 14:19

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for all the comments on this specimen.  I don’t know if it’s fake or not.  But I doubt it’s a fake on the understanding that it’s from Madagascar in which some Chinese dealers are buying loads of fossils and rocks from poor locals who collected everything that’d worth a dollar.  I’d think that it’s not prepped and was just taken out of the mud literally. Perhaps it’s not a croc but an archosaur or something like that. I just want to show it here so that we know better the fossils from the less known Madagascar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

wow,that eases my mind a lot.

Raising awareness of Malgachian vertebrates is indeed a lofty and wholesome purpose.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to see the piece prepared properly.

I think that it is a real fossil that is coated with a layer of matrix. 

The only way to be sure what it is would be to prep it.

Darwin said: " Man sprang from monkeys."

Will Rogers said: " Some of them didn't spring far enough."

 

My Fossil collection - My Mineral collection

My favorite thread on TFF.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...