Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Prehistoric Granite Hand Tools Plymouth, MA


Rock Slinger

Recommended Posts

Check this out. This article points out the reality of authenticating apparent early stone 'tools' with high authority within the orthodox science community when the stones features and location doesn' t fit the expectations of modern science. Looks like they'll need bones!

I don't! But now I better see why my local archeologist does.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2001/0801news.asp

Edited by Rock Slinger
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
  • Replies 31
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Rock Slinger

    19

  • Shaftsbury

    4

  • crystal sage

    3

  • Neognosis

    3

Future archeological digs should document the more obscure items that can be proven to be 'worked' and especially anything that looks 'shaped'. These future actions should someday successfully place them into our knowledge base, hopefully into a context that will satisfy academia.

Hi there, I've just got a few little points/observations.

I think to start off with, the objects you have could possibly be interesting, but you might have lost a lot of the information you'd need to be able to put them into any kind of context.

If you're photographing them, you should try using the camera directly above them and moving them to different positions. Don't use a flash, and place the rocks onto a surface which creates some degree of contrast to the colour of the rock. Use 2 lights/lamps, one on either side, pointing down at maybe 30-45 degrees. This means you'll get less glare from the rock (you can also reduce this by diffusing the light...place some thin paper in front of the bulb, something like tracing paper would have the right kind of effect, and this will stop the light being so harsh). You can try turning one lamp off at a time and taking some shots; this will create shadows from one side or the other and probably give a better impression of the surface markings. You should also place something in the shot to give an idea of the size...this could be a ruler, or something like a coin. Oh, and if you have a macro setting (it should have a little flower icon, probably...) then set it to that. If the lens is quite wide angled when it's zoomed right out, then zoom in it closer and move the camera further back, this will give better perspective on the image.

I suppose because granite is a relatively course rock, it doesn't make for a good cutting edge in the way that something like flint, slate, quartz or obsidian would, but it is pretty decent for grinding. If the site had been carefully excavated there might have been evidence of something having been ground, like plant seeds or that kind of thing.

One of the unfortunate things is that your way of dating something like a rock is, the vast majority of the time, going to come from analysing the context from which it was found. As soon as the artefact's been ripped out of the ground it becomes really difficult to associate it to any potential layers of stratigraphy (the further you get below the ground, generally the further back in time, but this can be affected by loads and loads of different factors) which might include clues towards working out what period they're from. Just because these things were below ground doesn't mean they're not from 20 years ago or something, and the marks could be from something modern. Then again, they could be something significant, but by destroying the context the ability to detect any useful information dies too. (could the foundation still be excavated properly, or has the bit of land these came from been entirely dug up?).

In this day and age it's really not enough just to have an interesting object, the context is all important, especially when it's made of stone. Even if these actually were some form of hand tool, you'll probably never be able to start to interpret them as such without a whole range of evidence. Good luck though!

I suppose you could maybe get some kind of petrological analysis (where the constituents of the rock can be examined to compare to known samples from different areas) to see if they're originating from that area, but you'd need to pay for it!

I hope you post the photos once they've been taken.

Future archeological digs should document the more obscure items that can be proven to be 'worked' and especially anything that looks 'shaped'. These future actions should someday successfully place them into our knowledge base, hopefully into a context that will satisfy academia.

Examining artefacts alone without the bigger picture is never going to satisfy academia. I wonder about the landscape though. Do you have a map reference for precisely where these were found? What had the are been used for recently, and as far back as records go?

Anyway, food for thought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi there, I've just got a few little points/observations.

I think to start off with, the objects you have could possibly be interesting, but you might have lost a lot of the information you'd need to be able to put them into any kind of context.

Most of these are surface collected after a good size dig with a big excavator, all torn up. No doubt that much of their context has ben obliterated. Others were already in rock piles from the previous homeowners. But a couple of them were found in the greatly eroded and undermined embankment at waters edge. For these some stratigraphy is still possible. When I have an archeological dig done here we can revisit those spots and hopefully get some context from that at least.

If you're photographing them, you should try using the camera directly above them and moving them to different positions. Don't use a flash, and place the rocks onto a surface which creates some degree of contrast to the colour of the rock. Use 2 lights/lamps, one on either side, pointing down at maybe 30-45 degrees. This means you'll get less glare from the rock (you can also reduce this by diffusing the light...place some thin paper in front of the bulb, something like tracing paper would have the right kind of effect, and this will stop the light being so harsh). You can try turning one lamp off at a time and taking some shots; this will create shadows from one side or the other and probably give a better impression of the surface markings. You should also place something in the shot to give an idea of the size...this could be a ruler, or something like a coin. Oh, and if you have a macro setting (it should have a little flower icon, probably...) then set it to that. If the lens is quite wide angled when it's zoomed right out, then zoom in it closer and move the camera further back, this will give better perspective on the image.

Thanks for the photography ideas. I will definately look into that. No apparent macro setting, but it does have a custom setting so maybe that can be set up for macro. I'll dig out the manual.

I suppose because granite is a relatively course rock, it doesn't make for a good cutting edge in the way that something like flint, slate, quartz or obsidian would, but it is pretty decent for grinding. If the site had been carefully excavated there might have been evidence of something having been ground, like plant seeds or that kind of thing.

(could the foundation still be excavated properly, or has the bit of land these came from been entirely dug up?).

The spot where a majority of the stones came from is probably pretty mixed up and the context destroyed. But there is plenty of untouched land on my lot that I suspect will provide more artefacts from within their context. Only a dig will tell.

In this day and age it's really not enough just to have an interesting object, the context is all important, especially when it's made of stone. Even if these actually were some form of hand tool, you'll probably never be able to start to interpret them as such without a whole range of evidence. Good luck though!

I suppose you could maybe get some kind of petrological analysis (where the constituents of the rock can be examined to compare to known samples from different areas) to see if they're originating from that area, but you'd need to pay for it!

We will likely find more and be able to extrapolate info from the other items hopefully

I hope you post the photos once they've been taken.

I will. I do think video is much much more revealing though and I may continue in that format also.

Examining artefacts alone without the bigger picture is never going to satisfy academia. I wonder about the landscape though. Do you have a map reference for precisely where these were found? What had the are been used for recently, and as far back as records go?

I have found more modern things like a steel sickle and a grinding wheel but have no idea what their story is either. The grinding wheel is 'modern' looking with a metal drive wheel attached. Its a very rural area with rolling foothills and kettle ponds scattered all around. Land would have been prime 'Indian' land, of that I have no doubt. Not sure if I want to map it to protect our privacy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I found this site while browsing today, they might be a good source of information if you haven't contacted them already:

The Massachusetts Archaeological Society (MAS) http://www.massarchaeology.org/index.htm

Yes, the local archeologist I contacted is heavily involved with MAS, and I have brought my son to his intro to archeology class at he awesome Robbins Museum. They are an excellent source and I plan to use them extensively. I bring my son to their childrens programs etc and we are both thrilled with their offerings and both look forward to learning a lot more.

I did find pictures of some Wmapanoag stone tools that look very similar to manyh of mine. They appear to be of the same type of granite in the pictures although they are not described as such. Here is a link to the picture ---> http://books.google.com/books?id=2smvZ6XIA...W9J1M&hl=en

Wampanoags are the most likely explanation to these things, but only a dig will tell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There seems to be a good deal of information on them, including their history with stone tools.

Have you been to Pimoth Plantation? http://www.plimoth.org/features/homesite.php

I have been there many times throughout my life and look forward to my next visit especially. Now that I am on a mission I have a whole new level of interest, and will keep an eye out for any similarities in their museum collections and even in their outdoor rock piles and stone walls. They open March 22nd for the season and I will be their soon afterwards no doubt. They have done test pits and some digging and have found items dating back around 6000 years on the premises. Plimouth Plantation is very close to me and I believe it is even free admission for residences of the town, so it should be a convenient and invaluable resource for me. I will offer my collection for display if they can be authenticated and there is any interest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.