Kinda funny

Freemindedclark

Sr. Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2017
Messages
373
Reaction score
669
Golden Thread
0
Location
Elliott Iowa
Detector(s) used
The Hubble telescope
Primary Interest:
Other
You must read the rules, and adhere to them.
 

Isn't a non-abusive disagreement necessary to the learning process?
 

Perhaps it has already been explained, but the Native American artifact collectors here have seen countless threads where people post completely natural rocks with unusual features which lead the posters to believe that they've been crafted or modified by a human hand. The collectors offer their opinions or analysis, and since they've had to do it hundreds of times before they are definitely not interested in having lengthy time and energy-draining debates about natural rocks. Apparently you pushed them a bit too far and exceeded the limits of their patience. Post some unambiguously worked stone and the response would be different, but items that at-best might maybe possibly have been "manuports" (handled and moved but otherwise unworked) are of no interest to them.
 

Perhaps it has already been explained, but the Native American artifact collectors here have seen countless threads where people post completely natural rocks with unusual features which lead the posters to believe that they've been crafted or modified by a human hand. The collectors offer their opinions or analysis, and since they've had to do it hundreds of times before they are definitely not interested in having lengthy time and energy-draining debates about natural rocks. Apparently you pushed them a bit too far and exceeded the limits of their patience. Post some unambiguously worked stone and the response would be different, but items that at-best might maybe possibly have been "manuports" (handled and moved but otherwise unworked) are of no interest to them.

I understand this and I appreciate all those that do take the time to read and respond. Maybe this isn't the right place to seek education. It doesn't take an expert to identify elaborate, highly worked artifacts. I guess I should only post things that have absolutely nothing to question!
 

I wrote a long post ,and did not beat the lock......

Anyways , keep looking.

In the specific thread , as in modern tools a cutting tool generally needs to be harder than what is being worked.
That matters in both the finished product ,and in the creation of that product.

IF a tool is to be abused or discarded soon after creation , it is different than a more special tool.More so when time and energy are considered.

Knocking something into crude shape for a small hammer head (vs grabbing a comfortable in the hand natural rock) and putting it in a split living tree limb for a couple years to have a low labor handle attachment , still means don't whack harder material with it.

As to the groove. Pecking can be faster than wearing a groove in hard material. Why finish the groove by smoothing? (That pesky labor thing again.)

Without a secure food source ,labor spent on tools would be an expensive luxury. Time might seem plentiful ,but creative/artistic type tool work needed time.
Yes some real pretties exist. So do one time use rocks...

Keep your neat finds ,but keep looking for upgrades too.
 

It can certainly take an expert to identify authentic elaborate, highly worked artifacts, but that is besides the point.

I'm not sure how your "learning process" operates but many of the collectors here have accumulated knowledge and experience going back well before I was born, and trying to stubbornly make the case to them that a natural rock is or could be something else will neither convince them nor engender much goodwill. If you are genuinely seeking education here all you need to do is go back and re-read the posts explaining to you that strange rocks are still just rocks. Education ≠ having your fanciful notions about rocks supported and agreed with.

I've learned over time that some of the items I had found were much more mundane than I had originally imagined, and while it is disheartening and sometimes embarrassing I'd much rather have the facts, learn, grow, and move on in search of the genuine articles. When ambiguous items are encountered, instead of getting creative and trying to imagine how it may have been crafted and used I try to critically analyze and disprove the artifactual interpretation (or authenticity) of the item. It helps to winnow the chaff a great deal. If you haven't done so already, get in touch with a discerning local collector and have them show you or even better let you handle some genuine pecked/ground stone artifacts and you will develop a much better instinctive feel for what was or was not worked by man. Good luck in your hunting, there are still plenty of awesome artifacts out there waiting to be found.
 

Freemindedclark, interesting that you would ask the opinions of highly knowledgeable people on here and then argue that they are wrong with their answers to your questions. Added up, there are hundreds of years of combined artifact experience in just a few of these folks. I have been collecting artifacts for just over 56 years and agree with most of the answering comments on your posts.
 

To elaborate and share some of my shame, here is a 10+ year old picture of some fascinating triangular "stones" found in different locations (silver crown is dollar sized). The first (top) was found along the Illinois river by my father when we were looking for artifacts. Another found in an old box of artifacts and fossils from an auction, and the last I found in fresh washed gravel used in a parking lot (I was looking for fossils). It took nearly a decade to obtain all 3 so I figured we were just very lucky.

1923680_633409440260_7470_n.webp

I'll bet ya 10 bucks that you'd find such items to be exceptionally intriguing as well, and argue ad-nauseam about the significance I once imagined they possessed.

To deepen the intrigue, I saw the same sort of faceted triangular objects of the same size presented in the "Central States Archaeological Journal" in the January (or thereabouts) 1997 issue, postulated as game-pieces or some other more ritually significant objects, so in college I picked the brains of all my archaeology professors and studied Native American symbolism, determining that they may have represented a stylized coiled snake (based on similar tri-lobed designs on ceramics etc.) and may have been somehow significant to their conception of the spiritual bridge between the underworld and mortal world (which snakes represented).

Well, it took a long while but I finally got in contact with the author of the article in the journal, and he informed me that he too was mistaken and had learned that the stones weren't special Native American talismans or game pieces, but instead relatively modern ceramic tumbling media used to remove burrs and roughness off of metal castings!

ceramic_media.webp

What a letdown...:sadsmiley:

Unfortunately no one at the University of Illinois had any idea about them and the archaeology professors encouraged my investigation; lending books etc. It taught me that despite their "expertise" even they don't know everything, and that it is better to be suspicious rather than overly credulous regarding anything of the sort. I've learned volumes since then but still learn more every day, and while I naturally prefer to defer to my own personal judgement it is a fact that there are many people out there who know far more about a particular subject than you or I or someone else knows, and thus they are to be heeded and respected even if not 100.00% correct at every moment in their life.
 

Thread is not locked, thread was moved to geofact forum.
 

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom