Hammer/Grinding stone?

[Wandermore91]

Found this in a big rock pile that was pushed by a backhoe. Don’t think the dings are from machinery though. Stone is very round and worn smooth. Opinions? Thanks

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Family Maps of Hinds County, Mississippi, Deluxe Edition - Grab it through Amazon!

[ptsofnc]

I would definitely explore that rock pile.

 

[Wandermore91]

I would definitely explore that rock pile.

[emoji16]you mean I got something!? Finally!! Tell me more pleaseee

 

[ptsofnc]

Maybe. Doesn't seem to have a lot of use wear...but maybe a little. But definitely has the shape of hammer stones I find. The ones I find do have edges with obvious battering.

 

[Wandermore91]

Maybe. Doesn't seem to have a lot of use wear...but maybe a little. But definitely has the shape of hammer stones I find. The ones I find do have edges with obvious battering.

It’s not quite spherical it’s more flattened.. But symmetrical. What caught my eye was the smooth texture compared to the surrounding rocks.

 

[Tnmountains]

For an item to be an artifact it has to be shaped or worked by man. It will have pecking or polishing and there is usually no doubt. You rock shows none of that but it is a nice shape. They could have used it as a natural rock but unless you find it in context with artifacts you will never know. Rocks from all over are different and they used what was available. Here are two in various stages of work and pecking found with other artifacts. Hope this helps.

 

[Wandermore91]

For an item to be an artifact it has to be shaped or worked by man. It will have pecking or polishing and there is usually no doubt. You rock shows none of that but it is a nice shape. They could have used it as a natural rock but unless you find it in context with artifacts you will never know. Rocks from all over are different and they used what was available. Here are two in various stages of work and pecking found with other artifacts. Hope this helps.

View attachment 1560200

You don’t think this rock displays any pecking or wear? I tried to show detail by posting it in three different kinds of light..I know what you’re saying, but looking at your examples I don’t think the textures are too far off

 

[Tnmountains]

Did you find any flint/chert debitage around that rock?

 

[Wandermore91]

Did you find any flint/chert debitage around that rock?

That’s what kind of sucks about this is it was mixed with dirt and it was obviously a large pile of everything that was displaced from idk where.. assuming they were clearing the surrounding field of debris and I found the dump pile. I did find a flake of slate in the same pile but this was the only significant find. I plan to go back and look more, things could be buried. This rock/dirt pile was about 10’ high and wider than it was tall .. to give you an idea. I climbed it to grab this.

 

[arrow86]

I think the context is everything for something like this ..... if I found that identical rock in the fields where I find points than I wouldn’t think twice about it being an artifact but if I found the same stone in a creek or a long the river I prob would have just discarded it as natural . From the pics it does look like it’s been pecked or used to crush things but very hard to verify without holding it and I have found some very similar to that maybe even same material also I have a few that do not have polish. I’ll try and find the one I was talking about and take some pics . I don’t have nearly as much knowledge as some people on here so see what some of the others with much more experience than me say . But in either case keep at it you will find a nice one soon enough

 

[reuellis]

If someone/something was chasing me I would pick that there stone to throw at said predator. Who knows? Nice river cobble in my mind and you could probably have a geologist tell you where the outcropping is. Tnmountains, can you show us some more pictures? The one in the background shows more usage than the foreground. I'm not saying it isn't just want to learn

 

[Wandermore91]

I’m confused. So do you guys rule this an artifact or not? lol

 

[ptsofnc]

Not trying to be vague and confuse you here. Sometimes you just cannot know with certainty and be sure. But I (if it were me) would still explore that rock pile and the surrounding area if this stone CAME FROM THIS GENERAL AREA. If it is a site, you should see/find evidence that it is with other findings. Good luck to you!

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

I’m confused. So do you guys rule this an artifact or not? lol

I really see nothing in your picture that says artifact, with out some kind of signs of being used by man I would say natural rock, I found many round stones like that in Missouri.

 

[Charl]

Your rock is a glacial cobble. In the 5th photo down, the skin or cortex is broken in a few small spots. I won't say it's absolutely impossible that someone could not have picked it up and hammered it once, but I will go with the consensus opinion, and instead show you some glacial cobbles that were used as hammerstones. Each of these were found in the same corn field, and every one shows battering wear at both ends of the cobbles, though I will just show the wear at one end. Otherwise, the skin or cortex is smooth and unaltered. These are typical examples of glacial cobbles of a suitable shape, and they are usually battered at both ends of the cobble.


After that, I'm going to make a suggestion, because, as you'll see, I think your making a mistake in focus that is very typical for beginners. I'll do that in another comment.....

OK, here is a large quartzite glacial cobble hammerstone, battered at both ends:



Battering on one end:



Here is another quartzite hammerstone, as seen when found, and battering seen on one end when picked up:





A smaller quartzite glacial cobble, and showing battering on one end. Remember, these are all typical in showing battering at both ends:





A friend found this one in the same field. It's a sandstone cobble, and the surface in first photo shows a sandstone surface that has experienced grinding. Sandstone was often used as a grinding stone, because, after all, it's a kind of natural sandpaper:

 

[Charl]

Now, I would like to simply make a suggestion. I notice that, for the most part, in your threads, you are picking up and looking at large rocks, and stones that cannot be knapped or flaked. Yet, for all of us, 95-99% of all the artifacts we find will be flaked stone artifacts. Things like points, knives, scrapers, drills, flake tools, etc. Artifacts made of the toolstones from our locality or region that could be knapped or flaked into the type of tools mentioned. Yet, many beginners seem to spend a lot of time looking at big rocks and for big tools. You did find a nice grooved weight, and hammerstones are common enough, actually, once you learn to recognize them.


That said, only a tiny % of the artifacts any of us find will be large hardstone tools, such as axes, gouges, adzes, pestles, celts, etc., etc., etc. The overwhelming % will be smaller flaked artifacts like those I mentioned, made, not of hardstone, but stones that can be knapped. In your first thread, you showed us quartz and argillite artifacts you found. What you really want to do, therefore, is learn to recognize the types of knappable toolstones found in your region, and find the type of artifacts made of those toolstones. In your region, that means learning to recognize, in agricultural fields, after heavy rains, and with permission, or on shorelines, toolstones such as quartz, argillite, rhyolite, quartzite, hornfels, chert or flint, jasper, and a few others.


You are far better off looking for what constitutes 95+% of what we all find, wherever we hunt: flaked stone artifacts. Eventually, you are likely to find ground stone tools, but they will always constitute a tiny % of your collection. Don't concentrate on large stones at all. Not at first, anyway. Keep your eye out, sure, but focus on what you are far more likely to find, because they are far more common. Flaked stone artifacts.


Here are four site frames. Meaning these are frames, each from a particular site, from RI. All the materials I mentioned above, the varieties of toolstones in other words, can be seen in these frames. What you need to do is familiarize yourself with the type of knappable material used in your region, and then recognize those lithics when you see them on the ground. Don't focus on big rocks at all. Focus on flakes. Where there are flakes, there will be points, etc. These frames show typical New England points, etc. No matter how many years you put in, this will constitute 95+% of what you are going to find....







Well, this last one is not a single site frame, but rather stuff from several sites in RI. But all typical styles and lithic materials found in southern New England:

 

[americanartifacts33]

I have a few hammerstones and or grinding stones all found in fields with artifacts here is a picture of some of them. I think the one with the drill holes is a firestarter or something similar to that. All these artificats were found in the same area.

 

[The Grim Reaper]

I just took some photos of some of better Hammerstones and Stone Tools to show someone so I'll share them here as well. As Charl said, the amount of Stone Tools you find is very small compared to Flint pieces.

I have collected for 53 years now, and though I do have quite a few Stone Tools, I have about 10 to 15 times more Flint pieces.

 

[americanartifacts33]

The Grim Reaper are those your finds? if so holy smokes that's awesome man!

 

[reuellis]

The object in question, in my opinion shows no apparent alteration by man. But keep asking and look for patterns, shapes, features. The notched points are the easy ones to identify.