Madonna figurines

[Kneedeep]

Rarely found

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

DR.ÖTEK Metal Detector, Waterproof Gold Detector, Pinpoint & Terrain Modes, Professional Metal Detector - Grab it through Amazon!

[Cannonman17]

Everybody here is used to me being way too honest and to the point already anyways so... I'll say it first, those aren't from any tribe, they are 100% natural stones. Welcome to the forum none the less!

 

[The Grim Reaper]

Very vivid imagination you have there. lol

 

[tchaire]

Kneedeep--

Please educate me on this type of artifact and please use sources other than
"an old man down the street once told me" with the information you supply.


Thanks-

T.

 

[The Grim Reaper]

Unless you are considering these as historic artifacts then how could the ancients in America have known about the Madonna? Even if they do look remotely similar to a woman holding a baby or just a woman, they are natural stones that have only been altered by nature and not by man. So what evidence do you have that they were ever used as a fertility item?

I am trying to give you the benefit of doubt here, but without solid evidence like being found in a grave or at a dig in context with other grave goods or artifacts it's just hard to fathom that these were actually artifacts and not just rocks that happen to look like a woman. I have rocks at home that were carved by weather that look like things too, but they are just natural stones and nothing else. As a matter of fact I have two that look just like what an Alien Grey is picture like with the big bulbous head and huge eyes, but that doesn't prove that in Indians were worshipping Spacemen.

 

[Bent-Twig]

Hey,

Welcome to the forum!!


Think of it this way. Have you seen the points that people display here? Have you seen the pendants , gorgets , bannerstones that people display here? How bout the axes , and celts? How bout the awesome pipes the indians made? These items were made w/care and respect to its use. All I am saying is why would something of such importance be made so crudely? Does'nt make sense. Keep trying tho , the artifacts are out there.

Happy Huntin' , Bent-Twig.

 

[The Grim Reaper]

I understand that all cultures going back to the beginning of man had a "God" or higher power that they worshipped. I also understand that most all cultures had Fertility Gods or Idols that they used and I have seen numerous pictures of those from all different parts of the world and all kinds of cultures. What you don't seem to understand is that all of those are obviously man made and are "carved" stone figures, terra cotta figures, or pottery figures that show evidence of being man made. Your items above show no such evidence whatsoever and are just natural rocks that happen to be in the shape of a woman. They may very well have been idolized by an earlier culture, but unless you can prove they were found in the context of a grave or associated with other artifacts in some way then they are just rocks. Just because you happened to pick up a rock out of a field or creek bed that looks like a women doesn't make it a fertility item.

 

[The Grim Reaper]

I f you want to make a "blind man" see then give me some hard evidence. Like you said, I don't know you so just you saying these are what they are isn't good enough for me. You find me some pictures or articles from others that have been found that are exactly like yours and then maybe I will begin to "see the light". Just you saying so doesn't mean squat to me.

 

[tchaire]

Please help us understand Kneedeep. That's all we're asking. If I picked up one of these figurines by the Wicomico Tribe (Is this the one you are talking about?), I might not even know what direction to look at it from. For example, if I held it upside down, I might think it was a woman kissing a baby instead of the way you placed it, where it looks more like a woman holding a baby.
I got the bag off my head, have removed the welding goggles, and am just waiting to see the light.
Thanks for your posts. T.

 

[MEinWV]

Can't find any references to this "Yucomico" tribe in several searches.

What comes to mind though is when I was a kid we had this soap that had a figuring hidden in it and you were forced to wash until you got to the prize.

Baffling!!

 

[The Grim Reaper]

Can't find any references to this "Yucomico" tribe in several searches.

What comes to mind though is when I was a kid we had this soap that had a figuring hidden in it and you were forced to wash until you got to the prize.

Baffling!!

I remember that soap. lol

 

[The Grim Reaper]

It seems you won't listen to anything anyone is trying to say to you.

 

[archaeon]

those are geofacts. only geofacts. never will be anything more than geofacts. don't be delusional or you will never find real artifacts.

 

[PBK]

Just a reminder to all who have posted in this thread...

Keep it clean.

Keep it civil.

Otherwise, your posts will be edited or deleted— and in extreme cases, you can be banned.

 

[Bent-Twig]

Kneedeep,

In your response to my post on your figures . You tossed in comparison of the Easter Island statues/heads to your figures. You stated that if the Easter Island statues weren't so big that they could also be dismisse as artifacts. I truely beleive that even if the Easter Island statues were only 1 1/2" tall that they would clearly still be identified as artifacts.The craftsmanship and the detail are there.I have included some photos of the Easter Island figures and your figures. When looking at the pictures try to vision that they are the same size as your pieces and compare the detail. I agree that there are many crude artifacts out there I find my fair share of them. In fact I find more crude than not. But every piece I bring home has signs of being worked by human hands. Some sort of chipping or grinding done to them.This is what makes an item an artifact. Something that seperates it from the average field rock. I appreciate your response to my post, and your input on your ideas of this great hobby. One thing I did notice is that you lashed out at some of the others on this forum and got them stirred up. Some of the very well expierienced artifact hunters on this forum I can assure you donot have welding goggles on or are blind. I dont beleive that your intent was to come to this forum and stir people up. I think you came here to express your intrest in our hobby.To keep someones intrest in your ideas would be to explain some more about your thoughts w/results from other researchers provided. Otherwise these would be just your thoughts alone.Some of my own personal thoughts and veiws on things have been questioned all of my life. People here will question your views when they are not of the norm. When they question your find you should try to explain w/out being brash or offensive by using comments of the other persons lack of knowledge. These are good people on this forum who love their hobby(our hobby).You mentioned that you you had celts axes and such, I would love to see the more common artifacts that you have found. I enjoy seeing others collections.


Happy Huntin' , Bent-Twig.

 

[Atlantis0077]

Afternoon,

I too must add to the chorus of geofact opinions. Fertility objects such as the Venus of Willendorf and other items all show clear signs being worked or altered by man. Those stones could be blobs of melted chocolate or caramel as easy as rocks. Nothing about them would suggest they were made. As was noted earlier Madonna and Child figures predate Christian culture and go back as far as Nimrod's wife of Tower of Babel fame....still such statues would have great attention to detail which your pieces lack.

Welcome to the forum and know we arent attacking you with our opinions, merely offering ours. You can believe whatever you wish regarding any item or artifact. Folks here have a vast array of experience. You might listen to what is said and consider it before dismissing all as not enlightenend enough to agree with you. Sometimes a rock is just a rock, no matter how interesting it might appear.

Have you any other relics from the site which produced your Madonna artifacts, or did the makers just bury them there for safe keeping? Other items found in context with your rocks might add a degree of legitimacy to them being artifacts and not geofacts.

Here is an interesting geofact I found in the middle of a Caddo village area. Its strange for sure, but probably not an artifact.

Atlantis

 

[archaeon]

i won't get into a shooting match with you sir. yes, i did look at them for two seconds before i made my mind up...that's all it took. actually, one glance at those geofacts shows that there is no human alteration done to them.
i have been around artifacts and fossils all my 40 years and have hunted/collected artifacts for half that time. i have found similar objects in rivers that resemble something, but are just geofacts, cool things, but not artifacts. i have one that looks just like a hound dog, a buddy found one that looks just like Buddha, which could also be any human form in a sitting position. your geofacts do have some human form characteristics, but they are definitely nature made.
this comes from extensive experience. i have a miniature Venus of Willendorf figurine...heard of them? these were made 24,000 to 26,000 years ago, and are definitely shaped like a woman, carved by human hands. i have Mayan stone beads, crudely shaped like human heads, crude, but still obvious that there was some kind of work done to them.
maybe there are only a few opinions differring to your in this thread because there are not alot of people that can tell the difference between geofact or artifact...maybe they haven't had alot of experience with them.

i didn't mean to offend you, and i apologise for using the term delusional.

please, if you can find an expert in man made female effigys to testify that your stones are in fact figurines of women, i will eat my hat.
it's even silly to debate the fact if they are or are not artifacts. if you believe so strongly that they are female figures, noone will change your mind.

they are funny shaped rocks that slightly resemble a human figure, in my opinion:geofacts

 

[ClonedSIM]

Hey kneesdeep.

It's funny how you gave your opinion that the finds were actually goefacts in the Axes Anyone? post, even though the original poster didn't ask for opinions. Yet, on this thread, you become hateful when people post the exact same opinion. It's clear from your tone you consider yourself to be a good bit more intelligent that anyone else posting here, so it should be very clear to you how very hypocritical you're acting right now.

I too believe your items to be formed of natural means, rather than hand-hewn. There seems to be no evidence of tool marks on the pieces, and there's no clear definition to the figures you report seeing. I admit I can see what it is your pointing to but, as other have alluded to, you can turn the artifact and see other designs as well.

Really, calm down, man! These are opinions of people that also have lots of experience in this field. You've stated more than once that we don't know you, and that's true, but the reverse as true as well. Isn't it possible that one or two of these folks are actually more well-trained than you in this particular field?

So, take a deep breath, and come right out and tell us why these objects cannot be anything other than what you claim they are.

 

[ClonedSIM]

You may also take into consideration of the hundreds of views made thus far of these items, there is but a few that disagree. It is those in disagreement that are of the minority.

One or two opinions does not make it so, it is through the efforts of the many professional and avocational researchers that the truth is reveled. I stand on the side of the many researchers.

The hundreds of views you reference above do not equal affirmations as to the validity of your finds. They simply mean that someone popped their head in, looked around, and left. If you truly believe that everyone who looked at this post agrees with you, why didn't they chime and say so? More likely they read your rude responses and retreated.

And, if you'll take the time to read the posts of those that did bother to respond here, you'll see that not one person has agreed with you. Now, I'm no math whiz, but I believe that puts you in the minority here.

And, please, since so many professionals have put forth the effort to prove that these items are what you say they are, then where can we find their work?

 

[mikez]

The hundreds of views you reference above do not equal affirmations as to the validity of your finds........ More likely they read your rude responses and retreated.

That's it exactly, at least from me. I couldn't force my imagination to see anything man made in those rocks. I kept my opinion to my self knowing that several much more knowledgable people would respond. Then when it got ugly, I just stayed out of it cause if I wanted stress, I'd go talk to my wife.
BTW, I did check in six or seven times to get a chuckle. I'm sure many others did the same so "hundreds of views" does not equal hundreds of indiviuals viewing.

My advice is to call those rocks "Virgin Mary" and offer them on EBAY. You'll probably make a few thousand bucks.