Hammerhead ¿?

[Daemonicrising]

Initially I thought it was just a chuck of metal until I got home and cleaned it up. The field I found it in has a roman Road running through it and there is a Fort and part of the Antonine Wall in nearby fields so I was wondering if it was possibly roman?

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

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

[tamrock]

I would think if it were Roman era iron it would be almost black in color because of a higher purity of iron My guess is that's maybe a 150 years give or take stone masons hammer. Mostly just speculation here on my end as I would need to see more angle of it and look for any other comparable hammer heads if in fact that what you have?? .

 

[Daemonicrising]

The first 2 pros are of a side angle and the third is an image from a website on roman tools, the item on the left looks similar.

 

[Back-of-the-boat]

The third pic has a very modern sickle blade in it from a sickle blade mower.

 

[kcm]

I'm not sure that 3rd image is from a sickle bar mower - would like to see more views of it first, as it looks more like a rock pick to me. But that's neither here nor there.

The 1st image in the lower pic looks as though the back end is a hammer, but the front end comes to a blunt edge, like for use as a splitting maul or for working hard ground; possibly rock. There's so much rust on the head in question that I can't clearly make out the shape. Would be nice to see some of the rust ground off or it run through electrolysis - something looks off in more than one way. In OP, the head isn't symmetrical; the top side seems to be flatter than the bottom (as looking at it). Then the right end is angled. Was it broken? Has it been damaged? Hard to say - might just be rust.

The larger pic in post #3 - the head seems to have a bend in it. Double check that with the OP image, looking from the hammer end, through the eye to the angled end - it doesn't make a straight line. Nowhere close. Maybe was thrown in with large boulders and they crushed/bent it? I don't know - just looks "off" to me.

 

[Bigcypresshunter]

I'm not sure that 3rd image is from a sickle bar mower - would like to see more views of it first, as it looks more like a rock pick to me. But that's neither here nor there.

http://www.treasurenet.com/forums/what/280901-old-farm-implement-sickle-bar-tooth.html



it puts the website on Roman tools in question

 

[kcm]

Agree to questionably disagree....maybe! But no more pics to go by, plus the topic is the OP tool head, so guess I best sit it out.

 

[austin]

Very old and very rare. Congratulations...

 

[Daemonicrising]

The third pic has a very modern sickle blade in it from a sickle blade mower.View attachment 1311033

The third photo on post ##3 is from
The Romans In Britain

The description is Roman iron tools: hammer (left), axe (centre) and field anvil (right).The anvil was used for sharpening scythes and sickles during harvesting.

 

[Daemonicrising]

OP? Yeah it certainly isn't symmetrical, don't know if that was bad workmanship or it broke and hence been discarded. I'm going to get the sanding disc to it and clean it up a bit.

 

[diggummup]

OP? Yeah it certainly isn't symmetrical, don't know if that was bad workmanship or it broke and hence been discarded. I'm going to get the sanding disc to it and clean it up a bit.

Do not take a sanding disc or wire brush or anything like that to any metal object that you are unsure of it's age or use. Especially living where you live. Use electrolysis, it's not difficult.


It seems some people don't really read or pay attention to things before they post. This object may or may not be of Roman age, but the one photo showing 3 objects definitely is. I don't know why people jump to conclusions just because something is shaped like a modern object, when in reality the modern object was purposely shaped like the ancient one. Because why? Form and function. In other words, because it did the job.

 

[kcm]

OP - the "O" can stand for 'opening' or 'original'. The "P" can stand for 'post' or 'poster'. It all refers back to the first (original) post.

Yeah, that 3rd head in pic #3, to "me", doesn't look anything like from a sickle mower other than a general shape. Thanks Daem for pointing out what that is.

 

[Bigcypresshunter]

Yeah, that 3rd head in pic #3, to "me", doesn't look anything like from a sickle mower other than a general shape. Thanks Daem for pointing out what that is.

I am not familiar with finds outside of the USA. As you said, would like to see more views of it. If BackoftheBoat is wrong, its all part of the identification learning process. But its hard to tell by one photo, it almost looks like it has a hole in the top filled with crud. Its hard to tell by one poor photo. Now if Digg says the third object "definitely is" Roman (field anvil) then I will take his word for it and will say no more about it. Thanks for verification of the photo/website And thanks for posting the Roman artifact webite, Daem. the site looks legit, now that we actually get to see it.

Back to the OPs item. I also agree. No sanding please. Considering where it was found, its a possibility. ELECTROLYSIS works wonders.

 

[Bigcypresshunter]

Talking about jumping to conclusions, one of these days when someone finds an old corroded Sickle bar, they are going to make claims of Romans discovering America after reading this

If anybody has any better photos of the Roman field anvil, I would sure like to see them to learn.

http://www.britishmuseum.org/resear...object_details.aspx?objectId=1363062&partId=1

 

[Daemonicrising]

Cheers guys. For the advice. Got a friend that works at a pump and valve cleaning place and they have a sonic bath so he's going to clean it up for me. I'll post better pictures when it's clean.

 

[kcm]

Well, as it has become part of the discussion, I guess I'll briefly tell how I view the two images in question...assuming I can figure out how to get both images here side-by-each.

....And, I can't. So you'll just have to scroll up and review the images - sorry.

I'll refer to Pic #3 of Post #3 (aa), the head on the right vs. Post #6 (bb):

The hole in aa is more towards the middle of the head while in bb it is at the rear. Also in aa, the rear of the head "appears" (from the limited view) to come to an edge. Blunt, yes, but it looks to me as a vertical edge, sort of like a dull axe or splitting maul, only with a much shorter edge. In image bb, the rear is rounded and full height.

From what "I" see of aa, I'm not sure I'd classify it as an anvil - I'd need to do more research. It looks like a tool head with a point on one end and a short, dull edge on the other. Do ancient anvils look like this? I dunno. Do more modern sickle mower parts look like this? Again, I dunno. I've seen a few mowers up close but have never worked on one or operated one. Never really paid that much attention to them, to be honest. Almost bought one at an auction one time, but it sold for a LOT more than I was willing to go.

 

[Daemonicrising]

Well, as it has become part of the discussion, I guess I'll briefly tell how I view the two images in question...assuming I can figure out how to get both images here side-by-each.

....And, I can't. So you'll just have to scroll up and review the images - sorry.

I'll refer to Pic #3 of Post #3 (aa), the head on the right vs. Post #6 (bb):

The hole in aa is more towards the middle of the head while in bb it is at the rear. Also in aa, the rear of the head "appears" (from the limited view) to come to an edge. Blunt, yes, but it looks to me as a vertical edge, sort of like a dull axe or splitting maul, only with a much shorter edge. In image bb, the rear is rounded and full height.

From what "I" see of aa, I'm not sure I'd classify it as an anvil - I'd need to do more research. It looks like a tool head with a point on one end and a short, dull edge on the other. Do ancient anvils look like this? I dunno. Do more modern sickle mower parts look like this? Again, I dunno. I've seen a few mowers up close but have never worked on one or operated one. Never really paid that much attention to them, to be honest. Almost bought one at an auction one time, but it sold for a LOT more than I was willing to go.

The actual piece in question is the photo in #1 and the first 2 in #3 the 3rd pictures in #3 was a reference from a site about romans in Britain and it was comparing the hammer in the far left of this photo with the original.

 

[kcm]

Yes, and I'm sorry the "other" pic has become such a distraction. However, as things had gotten so far off course, and as this thread will remain in archives for years, it needed to be made known that the "other" pic was most likely not from a sickle mower. Again, I'm not saying it isn't, as to do that I would have to be a sickle mower expert - but I don't think it is. Please forgive the hijacking of the thread.