Caltrop?

[Beeps in my sleep]

This was found in front of a fort built in the 1700s to protect against indian attacks. Shippensburg also was invaded by 20,000 confederates during the civil war. I know setlers used to throw these out to stop Indians in pursuit but it also stopped calvary. Does this look like civil war or french and indian war to you guys?

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

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

[Silver Searcher]

is there 100% "warranted documentation" of any war, as to tactics used ?
sometimes during wars , things are suggested that they know just ain't right,
But in desperation are used.

a horse weighs how Much ? a marble would probably take care of a horse in the right circumstance, as could a child's jack

Perhaps they were against the rules of war to use them maybe that's why they are not documented, but this item posted looks to have been produced by a mould, most of the google images of Caltrops are nasty looking with sharper prongs, even the make shift ones that have been made up from barbed wire.

SS

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Diving for Pleasure and Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[Diggin'PA]

I agree with Jeff... ever step on a small lego that your kid dropped? OUCH!

is there 100% "warranted documentation" of any war, as to tactics used ?
sometimes during wars , things are suggested that they know just ain't right,
But in desperation are used.

a horse weighs how Much ? a marble would probably take care of a horse in the right circumstance, as could a child's jack

 

[Beeps in my sleep]

All interesting points...I didn't mean to cause a war guys so I am sorry. Interesting thought though, remember many Confederates literally marched their shoes to pieces and were barefoot. They would have to steal boots off of the dead from both sides if they couldn't afford new ones. Even if this isn't what I thought it was and got so excited by finding, I wouldn't want to step on this barefoot marching with already blistered feet.

 

[ivan salis]

you got that right.

 

[CRUSADER]

OK. I have no experience in these apart from the UK Medieval/post medieval period, so these are just my thoughts based on the fact you put a ? in your title & therefore were looking for answers.
Common sense would say that if they deployed the one you found, they would have scattered hundreds (minium), so where are the rest you found? Think about the huge number of people that search CW battlesites, do any of them have bucket loads of these, because they should if large numbers were deployed? Correct?

Its not uncommon for books to get it wrong, thats where our collective expertise on TNET can help you/anyone. There are several respected & experienced people on here that have put some extremely convincing arguements that they are not CW & I for 1 am willing to agree with them.

Sorry if thats not the answer you were hoping for, but I'm a follower of facts & I hope you will be as well. Because there it no credit in fooling yourself. No offense meant. We should all be proud of the FREE help we get on here, so keep hunting & learning because when I stop learning I will quit detecting.

 

[CC Hunter]

Knowledge and wisdom collectively provide the best answers!

Well spoken words Crusader!


CC Hunter

 

[Diggin'PA]

Just a thought....if these objects are made of iron... don't alot of detectorist notch out or ignore iron signals... therefore many would not be recovered? again, just a thought.

OK. I have no experience in these apart from the UK Medieval/post medieval period, so these are just my thoughts based on the fact you put a ? in your title & therefore were looking for answers.
Common sense would say that if they deployed the one you found, they would have scattered hundreds (minium), so where are the rest you found? Think about the huge number of people that search CW battlesites, do any of them have bucket loads of these, because they should if large numbers were deployed? Correct?

Its not uncommon for books to get it wrong, thats where our collective expertise on TNET can help you/anyone. There are several respected & experienced people on here that have put some extremely convincing arguements that they are not CW & I for 1 am willing to agree with them.

Sorry if thats not the answer you were hoping for, but I'm a follower of facts & I hope you will be as well. Because there it no credit in fooling yourself. No offense meant. We should all be proud of the FREE help we get on here, so keep hunting & learning because when I stop learning I will quit detecting.

 

[CRUSADER]

Just a thought....if these objects are made of iron... don't alot of detectorist notch out or ignore iron signals... therefore many would not be recovered? again, just a thought.

Experienced CW hunters know to dig iron (i'm sure a few will tell you), they not only hide good finds but are often good finds in themselves, so I'm afraid that theory is only good for those who cherry pick. (their collections will suffer)

 

[jeff of pa]

link removed

sorry Ric Savage ? He's already proven his lack of Credibility .
This should be deleted for that reason alone

 

[CC Hunter]

The league of experienced experts here on TreasureNet, those having devoted actual decades to research and recovery of real artifacts from the American Civil War, are much more qualified in ascribing correct identification, versus those that rely on popular hype and media, and current entertainment's venue for painting history with neon colors.




CC Hunter

 

[jeff of pa]

sorry Ric Savage ? He's already proven his lack of Credibility .
This should be deleted for that reason alone

Thank You pippinwhitepaws

 

[Silver Searcher]

Just a thought....if these objects are made of iron... don't alot of detectorist notch out or ignore iron signals... therefore many would not be recovered? again, just a thought.

A iron target of that size would take some notching out.

SS

 

[TheCannonballGuy]

Diggin'PA wrote:
> Cannonball Guy... I didn't question your credentials so why do I need to read your "About ME"

Since you seem to have taken offense about me mentioning my Professional Credentials when you didn't ask for them, let me explain why I did that. You posted a photo showing an Archeology book's mis-identification of an object. Most people perceive a book to be an AUTHORITATIVE information-source. I know from past experience that there was a high probability that somebody who read my reply would say "CannonBallGuy, who the heck are you, to be correcting what an Archeology book says?" Therefore, I pointed to my Professional Credentials. My college degree includes Archeology training. Also, during the past 30-something years I've written two books and numerous magazine-articles on archeological artifacts (excavated civil war and EARLIER artifacts). But if people don't know about my professional credentials as a Historical Archeologist, some of them won't take my correction of that Archeology book's identification-error seriously. I'm sorry that my reply caused you to take offense. That was not my intention. I hope you now understand why I said what I said in it.

The reason I replied is that Beeps In My Sleep posted his find's identification with a question-mark ("Caltrops?"). That is an invitation to answer with corrective information if the identification is incorrect.

The problem is, when somebody posts an incorrect relic-identification, and nobody speaks up to correct the mis-identification, the hundreds of people who read the post will assume the identification is correct.

In this case, PART of my reason for speaking up is to give relic-collectors the educational information needed to keep them from paying $45 apiece for the 20th-Century Mill-Stars being sold as so-called "civil war caltrops" at various websites and on Ebay.

 

[Diggin'PA]

No problem cannonballguy... thanks for clearing that up... no harm, no foul... can you PM me the books you have you written? would like to give them a read and add to my library. Can never have enough references when it comes to history.

Diggin'PA wrote:
> Cannonball Guy... I didn't question your credentials so why do I need to read your "About ME"

Since you seem to have taken offense about me mentioning my Professional Credentials when you didn't ask for them, let me explain why I did that. You posted a photo showing an Archeology book's mis-identification of an object. Most people perceive a book to be an AUTHORITATIVE information-source. I know from past experience that there was a high probability that somebody who read my reply would say "CannonBallGuy, who the heck are you, to be correcting what an Archeology book says?" Therefore, I pointed to my Professional Credentials. My college degree includes Archeology training. Also, during the past 30-something years I've written two books and numerous magazine-articles on archeological artifacts (excavated civil war and EARLIER artifacts). But if people don't know about my professional credentials as a Historical Archeologist, some of them won't take my correction of that Archeology book's identification-error seriously. I'm sorry that my reply caused you to take offense. That was not my intention. I hope you now understand why I said what I said in it.

The reason I replied is that Beeps In My Sleep posted his find's identification with a question-mark ("Caltrops?"). That is an invitation to answer with corrective information if the identification is incorrect.

The problem is, when somebody posts an incorrect relic-identification, and nobody speaks up to correct the mis-identification, the hundreds of people who read the post will assume the identification is correct.

In this case, PART of my reason for speaking up is to give relic-collectors the educational information needed to keep them from paying $45 apiece for the 20th-Century Mill-Stars being sold as so-called "civil war caltrops" at various websites and on Ebay.

 

[Robert Eugene]

Google this,

odd items found in 100 year old machine shop.

Although I see tumbling media for rough iron castings, some may see caltrops, they may not be military or civil war but they could be very old. The OP's original photo show rounded edges from heavy use, the ones in the posting I linked to are fresh.

 

[TheCannonballGuy]

Diggin'PA, as you requested I will PM you the titles of the books I've written. They are about civil war (and earlier) artillery projectiles, fuzes, grenades, rockets, etc.

Also, I've been writing a continuing series of articles for North/South Trader's Civil War magazine. (See the two most recent issues of that magazine, if you have any interest about such things.) In the current series, I provide well-documented correction of mis-identifications which are in the McKee-&-Mason book on civil war projectiles. For example, one of the mis-identified relics is a Model-T Ford spindle bushing which the book says is a civil war artillery fuze (see photo on the book's page 152, items #51 & 52).

This discussion-thread is prompting me to finish writing an article I've been working on for the magazine about mill-stars (Metalcasting Industry tumbler-mill media) and actual caltrops.

 

[lookindown]

Did Creskol get a time out?

 

[TheCoinKid]

Don't know. All of his posts on the thread were removed, then he posted a "sort of" apology, which was also removed.

 

[romeo-1]

Arrgghh...I hate reading threads with deleted posts...

 

[pippinwhitepaws]

I don't hate much...I do delete posts when some people decide to harass my opinion instead of following the topic.