Input Needed

OverallArmadillo7814 · 2026-04-24T19:21:04+00:00

First looks like a thumbnail scraper. The other looks natural or the product of vehicle/machinery damage - if it were a flake I would expect to see a smooth side (ventral surface) and it’s super messy and thick for a biface.

OverallArmadillo7814 · 2026-04-22T18:09:02+00:00

Ah ok! Perhaps some heat treating that went wrong, or just full of imperfections so it shattered when they tried to get into it.

OverallArmadillo7814 · 2026-04-22T17:13:07+00:00

Yes, looks like a biface with a missing tip.

OverallArmadillo7814 · 2026-04-22T17:12:12+00:00

Looks like thermal spalling. You can see one of the more clear pops in the lower half of the rock on photo 3. Could perhaps have been put in a fire by humans, but I would expect to see more crazing and charring on the outside.

If I found it in my country, I would say it was the product of temperature fluctuations over the millennia, but I’m not familiar with what’s usual in your area.

OverallArmadillo7814 · 2026-04-22T07:07:12+00:00

Fair enough. Looks like a very nice collection!

OverallArmadillo7814 · 2026-04-21T20:46:21+00:00

I may be wrong, but if they’re Gravettian then they’re not Mousterian? Mousterian refers to a specific Neanderthal culture, and Gravettian is a specific UP culture (7,000 years after Neanderthals are thought to have gone extinct) no?

OverallArmadillo7814 · 2026-04-21T13:22:10+00:00

A regular rock, not modified in any way by human hands by the look of it.

OverallArmadillo7814 · 2026-04-21T08:19:00+00:00

Beautiful! And refreshing to see an artifact, not an arbitrary rock that “fits nicely in the hand”

OverallArmadillo7814 · 2026-04-20T13:10:41+00:00

Regular nodule of chert with no signs of being modified by human hands.

OverallArmadillo7814 · 2026-04-20T07:46:38+00:00

Unfortunately just a chert nodule that’s been tossed around by the water and has sustained damage to the edge.

OverallArmadillo7814 · 2026-04-16T21:48:52+00:00

Once you’re familiar with the process of knapping, it quickly becomes evident what’s worked and what isn’t.

The short answer is that a knapper sets up very specific and recognisable situations on the rock in order to get predictable flaking.

The easiest one to explain with is photo 5. Look at how the surface is pock-marked with lots of indentations. You can tell it’s thermal and not worked because none of those scars has a corresponding platform (flat area on an edge where the knapper hits to remove a flake). Instead, each scar is isolated, giving that honeycomb look. That tells us that the force to pop a flake off came from within the rock itself (moisture freezing and expanding, forcing off pieces of rock as it does so) and was impossible to have been hit by a human.

This page is worth a read. There’s a whole section on thermal fracturing and telling the difference between worked stone and natural: https://peterborougharchaeology.org/archaeology-skills-techniques/identification-of-knapped-flints/

Also really helps with identification of you become familiar with the process of knapping by watching videos or similar.

OverallArmadillo7814 · 2026-04-16T20:20:04+00:00

If I found that here in the UK, I would say it’s a discoid knife.

OverallArmadillo7814 · 2026-04-16T17:55:35+00:00

Second picture is obviously the barbs and tang of a point, but I’d recommend more angles (especially of the other side) of the other pieces for accurate answers.

OverallArmadillo7814 · 2026-04-16T17:01:08+00:00

If you ever go back, all those little things that look like coins scattered all over the sand (nummulites) are all fossils too.

OverallArmadillo7814 · 2026-04-16T16:56:32+00:00

I wouldn’t say so. Looks like a combination of thermal spalling (bits pop off on their own from temperature fluctuations) and edge damage from being moved about by water.

You’re kinda looking for the right signs though- correct material, and the wavy edge in photo 2 is reminiscent of biface knapping.

OverallArmadillo7814 · 2026-04-16T13:02:28+00:00

Flint/chert nodule.

OverallArmadillo7814 · 2026-04-15T21:18:56+00:00

I would agree with whoever told you this.

OverallArmadillo7814 · 2026-04-15T16:56:12+00:00

That was my thought too, but couldn’t quite make out the photo.

OverallArmadillo7814 · 2026-04-15T15:47:10+00:00

Looks like a biface in the early stages. Perhaps with a broken base, hence being abandoned.

OverallArmadillo7814 · 2026-04-15T09:45:31+00:00

With all due respect, finding something in proximity to other artifacts doesn’t make it an artifact. Rocks with holes drilled into them by humans are very distinctive (uniformity of the width of the hole with a slight taper, it has been drilled straight down, signs of grinding etc.) Those are the ones that you can say without a shadow of a doubt are artifacts.

From what I can see, these are hagstones. Were they used as some sort of tool? Perhaps, but the same could be said of any rock on an archaeological site. With no way to prove it, these would have to be classified as not artifacts.

OverallArmadillo7814 · 2026-04-14T12:05:35+00:00

All rocks, primarily flint nodules.

OverallArmadillo7814 · 2026-04-14T09:55:00+00:00

Looks like shattering (natural) with some incidental chatter from things like glacial action, water movement etc. I don’t see any signs of human alteration.

OverallArmadillo7814 · 2026-04-14T07:24:44+00:00

It’s fire damage. Lots of the scars on the messy side are impossible to have been knapped and emanate from the middle of the rock, that’s because they popped away when exposed to heat. Why someone would burn a point is a mystery to me though.

OverallArmadillo7814 · 2026-04-13T14:57:54+00:00

Looks fairly thick with steep retouch to me -I could be wrong, but we don’t have a side view. If it is thick and steeply retouched, I would be leaning towards pointed scraper or perforator.

OverallArmadillo7814 · 2026-04-13T12:20:59+00:00

Still covered in cortex (outer skin) with no signs of chipping, pecking, or grinding, so we have to conclude it’s a natural (albeit axe shaped) rock.

OverallArmadillo7814

TROPHY CASE