Long shot-I know, but.....

[autographcollector11]

Found on the shores of lake Michigan. It has a feel or marble but may be chert. I see two small percussion marks near the bottom. While I know this is no where near being an artifact, are these small ripple marks natural or made by manual striking?
thanks everyone

---

.

 

[NC field hunter]

I think that is an artifact. It looks like flaked edges. By the way, if you want to find out if it's marble, find out what your room temp. Is. Marble will be 5-8 degrees cooler than room temp.

 

[Jon Stewart]

Did you find it up by Norwood ( north of Traverse city). It sure looks like Norwood chert.

 

[Tonto]

Looks like chert to me because of the concoidal fracture. Marble doesn't have concoidal fracture, and is more crystaline. Does the other side of the rock have any evidence of flaking, or is it just on the one side?

 

[monsterrack]

Tonto is right marble will not chip and your piece looks to have been flaked,JMO Ithink it's an artifact.

 

[autographcollector11]

Here are a few more pictures. I included both sides and the edges. I admit that the edges look flaked in parts. Does this still look like an artifact and if so-what was it?

it was found on a beach about 30 miles north of downtown Chicago in lake Michigan.

 

[Tonto]

It looks like it was used as a small hammer, judging by the nicks in the blunt end of the photos on the left.

 

[autographcollector11]

Thanks
Just curious since I have no formal knapping experience- but could those hammer or percussion marks be due to other rock damage while in the water? I want to think that it is all worked by man but still curious is anything was due to Mother Nature

If it is a hammer, are these from a certain time period?

Thanks for everyone's help !!

 

[Tonto]

I'm not an archeologist or paleontologist, but if there were other similar marks around the rock that are similar to the one end, I would think it was done by natural processes. Clearly, the piece has been there for a long time as evidenced by the smooth appearance of the concoidal fractures. They look like they've been worn down a little with wave and water action. I don't think this was an artifact that was manufactured. It may have been used as a tool of convenience to break small pieces from another rock, or to crush break small bones. Since it was found in an area where many rocks were probably available, I don't have enough education and experience to venture a reliable guess. I might have even been used by a small boy to hammer other rocks like his dad did. I really don't know.

 

[Tnmountains]

The work seems to be man made and deliberate. Worn but does not appear to be from river or wave tumble. Good eye and welcome to the forum.

 

[autographcollector11]

Thanks everyone! Does this type of artifact have a formal name or is it just debitage?

 

[rock]

flake tool

 

[Jon Stewart]

Looks like a few flakes have been taken off. I would consider it debitage. There is another area along the lake down by south haven that has some knappable rock. I think it is called Deer Lick creek.

Rock: what is a flake tool?

 

[rock]

Looks like a few flakes have been taken off. I would consider it debitage. There is another area along the lake down by south haven that has some knappable rock. I think it is called Deer Lick creek.

Rock: what is a flake tool?

Well it isnt a flake so I guess tool would be a better way to put it. We call them flakers here. Usually allot thinner with the edges worked.