Napoleon North Posted September 17, 2012 Share Posted September 17, 2012 (edited) flint tools? Edited September 17, 2012 by Napoleon North Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ashcraft Posted September 17, 2012 Share Posted September 17, 2012 Possibly cores left after making tools. Where there several of them together? Brent Ashcraft ashcraft, brent allen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Napoleon North Posted September 17, 2012 Author Share Posted September 17, 2012 Possibly cores left after making tools. Where there several of them together? Brent Ashcraft One specimen found on a dirt road. A second gravel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S233 Posted September 17, 2012 Share Posted September 17, 2012 The look like tools to me but i am not sure. Anyway nice finds.... : ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kosmoceras Posted September 17, 2012 Share Posted September 17, 2012 Which one was found in the dirt road? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Napoleon North Posted September 17, 2012 Author Share Posted September 17, 2012 (edited) Which one was found in the dirt road? the right-hand Flint nice is not it? Edited September 17, 2012 by Napoleon North Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
painshill Posted September 17, 2012 Share Posted September 17, 2012 The look like tools to me but i am not sure. Anyway nice finds.... Nice finds? Blimey… let me know how many tonnes you would like! My pricing is very reasonable, but you pay the shipping cost. Napoleon… or anyone else… here’s a little test for you. Which of the following 8 items are artefacts? Just as a clue, the answer is not “all of them”. There’s a mixture here… dug from my garden an hour ago; produced by me dropping a flint cobble from a height of 1.5 meters half an hour ago; from a nearby unsurfaced road, from the gravel bed of a dried up stream; from a sack of builder’s aggregate; from a Magdalenian site in France. Bonne Chance! Roger I keep six honest serving-men (they taught me all I knew);Their names are What and Why and When and How and Where and Who [Rudyard Kipling] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AgrilusHunter Posted September 17, 2012 Share Posted September 17, 2012 Hmmm ... I'm gonna have to say D. Seriously though, I'd go with #2 for a potential artifact since it shows signs of edge work and a nice pressure wave pattern on the face. #4 looks possible too, its all just guess work though. Still a fun little test, thanks for putting it together. I await my mark. "They ... savoured the strange warm glow of being much more ignorant than ordinary people, who were only ignorant of ordinary things." -- Terry Pratchett Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auspex Posted September 17, 2012 Share Posted September 17, 2012 I rather like #4 as a candidate. "There has been an alarming increase in the number of things I know nothing about." - Ashleigh Ellwood Brilliant “Try to learn something about everything and everything about something.” - Thomas Henry Huxley >Paleontology is an evolving science. >May your wonders never cease! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xiphactinus Posted September 17, 2012 Share Posted September 17, 2012 I rather like #4 as a candidate. my vote too....shows multiple strikes from the same angle, location with a similar amount of force. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
painshill Posted September 17, 2012 Share Posted September 17, 2012 I’ll give the answers when Napoleon has cast his votes. I’ve shown 8 items and given 6 possible origins, including “artefact”. So you know at least one and perhaps as many as three items are artefacts. The artefact period in question is Upper Palaeolithic (9,000 – 17,000 years ago) and overlapping into the Mesolithic. Exactly the period when there was an explosion in small bladelet technology… tiny denticulate scrapers, knives, gravers, composite multi-bladed items. All the items pictured have sharp cutting edges and/or points. You’re looking for things like intentional flaking, secondary working of cutting surfaces and such. Roger I keep six honest serving-men (they taught me all I knew);Their names are What and Why and When and How and Where and Who [Rudyard Kipling] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
New Members cvi huang Posted September 17, 2012 New Members Share Posted September 17, 2012 (edited) #8 is artefact? is it #4 and #8 or zero artefact and #3 also suspicious Edited September 17, 2012 by cvi huang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herb Posted September 18, 2012 Share Posted September 18, 2012 (edited) Not every random piece of chert or flint found is an artifact. Just sayin'. I go with #4 with the multiple looking strikes. Edited September 18, 2012 by Herb "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"_ Carl Sagen No trees were killed in this posting......however, many innocent electrons were diverted from where they originally intended to go. " I think, therefore I collect fossils." _ Me "When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."__S. Holmes "can't we all just get along?" Jack Nicholson from Mars Attacks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
painshill Posted September 21, 2012 Share Posted September 21, 2012 (edited) OK… Napoleon didn’t want to play, but since I’ll be heading to the States for a couple of weeks very shortly I won’t make you wait any longer. Number 1 is from a sack of builder’s aggregate; 2, 3 & 8 from me dropping a flint cobble; 5 is out of my garden; 6 is from an old stream bed and 7 was from an unsurfaced road. Anything you can see that looks artefact-related is natural conchoidal or planar fracturing (because that’s how flint breaks), pseudo-faceting from frost or mechanical damage, edge-chattering from water tumbling and coincidental shapes that are merely suggestive of scrapers, blades or gravers. Only number 4 is an artefact – a Magdalenian micro-blade scraper. Xiphactinus has put his finger on the main clues, but generally well done to all of you. As Herb says, not every random piece of flint is an artefact – however sharp or pointed it might be, however much it looks the right shape and however nicely it might seem to fit in the hand. That item shows clear evidence of intentional and logical working, has complete cortex removal, a shallow blade angle and the patination is uniform across the cutting and non-cutting surfaces. Also, it’s a known tool form (thousands have been found with exactly that design) and it came from a site with a known and relevant archaeological context. If you find anything sharp or pointy that doesn’t have this kind of clear evidence, you can speculate all you like but you can’t definitively say you’ve found an artefact – particularly not if you found it on a dirt road or in a gravel bed. Napoleon, those items are not artefacts. Neither are they cores. I don’t see any signs of percussion platforms, points of percussion, or other features associated with knapping techniques: Edited September 21, 2012 by painshill Roger I keep six honest serving-men (they taught me all I knew);Their names are What and Why and When and How and Where and Who [Rudyard Kipling] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herb Posted September 21, 2012 Share Posted September 21, 2012 OK… Napoleon didn’t want to play, but since I’ll be heading to the States for a couple of weeks very shortly I won’t make you wait any longer. Number 1 is from a sack of builder’s aggregate; 2, 3 & 8 from me dropping a flint cobble; 5 is out of my garden; 6 is from an old stream bed and 7 was from an unsurfaced road. Anything you can see that looks artefact-related is natural conchoidal or planar fracturing (because that’s how flint breaks), pseudo-faceting from frost or mechanical damage, edge-chattering from water tumbling and coincidental shapes that are merely suggestive of scrapers, blades or gravers. Only number 4 is an artefact – a Magdalenian micro-blade scraper. Xiphactinus has put his finger on the main clues, but generally well done to all of you. As Herb says, not every random piece of flint is an artefact – however sharp or pointed it might be, however much it looks the right shape and however nicely it might seem to fit in the hand. That item shows clear evidence of intentional and logical working, has complete cortex removal, a shallow blade angle and the patination is uniform across the cutting and non-cutting surfaces. Also, it’s a known tool form (thousands have been found with exactly that design) and it came from a site with a known and relevant archaeological context. If you find anything sharp or pointy that doesn’t have this kind of clear evidence, you can speculate all you like but you can’t definitively say you’ve found an artefact – particularly not if you found it on a dirt road or in a gravel bed. Napoleon, those items are not artefacts. Neither are they cores. I don’t see any signs of percussion platforms, points of percussion, or other features associated with knapping techniques: Nice! "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"_ Carl Sagen No trees were killed in this posting......however, many innocent electrons were diverted from where they originally intended to go. " I think, therefore I collect fossils." _ Me "When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."__S. Holmes "can't we all just get along?" Jack Nicholson from Mars Attacks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
creekrocks Posted September 21, 2012 Share Posted September 21, 2012 I somewhat sympathize with Napoleon. When my husband and I started looking for artifacts, we thought many (err...or most) rocks had been touched by human hands that were not. It can be confusing because broken flint can produce such sharp edges (no doubt why the native peoples chose to use it). Anyways, it wasn't until we found actual artifacts that we were able to see the deliberateness with which they were made. I highly recommend that you visit a local museum with an artifact collection or find a local club/collector that will show you actual pieces. I am sure you would quickly see the difference. And that was great info, painshill! We are headed to a knap-in in a couple of weeks and I can't wait to see the process in action. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scylla Posted September 21, 2012 Share Posted September 21, 2012 Thanks painshill, I wish I got to play the game Maybe you could put together a contest for us to get more practice?I would just recommend showing more than one surface of each unknown because I thought #2 might have been worked on the other side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AgrilusHunter Posted September 21, 2012 Share Posted September 21, 2012 Fun test painshill, and great explanation. Thanks! "They ... savoured the strange warm glow of being much more ignorant than ordinary people, who were only ignorant of ordinary things." -- Terry Pratchett Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Napoleon North Posted September 23, 2012 Author Share Posted September 23, 2012 (edited) Fun test painshill, and great explanation. Thanks! about 2 cm Next flint... Found in gravel. http://www.paleodirect.com/n044.htm Edited September 23, 2012 by Napoleon North Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Napoleon North Posted September 23, 2012 Author Share Posted September 23, 2012 Babimost .Western Poland about 25mm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
New Members cvi huang Posted September 23, 2012 New Members Share Posted September 23, 2012 stone stone stone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Napoleon North Posted September 25, 2012 Author Share Posted September 25, 2012 Next Found in the gravel next to the construction of the University Jagiellonian. about 3cm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kosmoceras Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 Not this time, stone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Napoleon North Posted September 26, 2012 Author Share Posted September 26, 2012 Not this time, stone. Or it may be waste for the production of flint tools? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auspex Posted September 26, 2012 Share Posted September 26, 2012 Your hopes are overriding the logical interpretation of the evidence; all that may reasonably concluded, in the absence of telltale markers not produced by natural means, is that these are chips and fragments of flint, and are indistinguishable from all the other natural shards of broken flint in the world. "There has been an alarming increase in the number of things I know nothing about." - Ashleigh Ellwood Brilliant “Try to learn something about everything and everything about something.” - Thomas Henry Huxley >Paleontology is an evolving science. >May your wonders never cease! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now