Graver?/Material?/Paleo?

[Bolen Bevel 1]

In my opinion it's a spokeshave.

[CMD]

Bolen Bevel 1 wrote:

In my opinion it's a spokeshave.

  Thanks, Keith. With one, and probably 2, gravers, plus a scraper edge, it's a neat multipurpose tool, including spokeshave.

[shartis]

I picked this one up some years back. I thought it was a piece of porcelain but had the look and wear type pattern of  a gun flint to me so I kept it. Same size as a few others I found. The material looks like porcelain to me. Didn't find any other pieces of porcelain around the area. I'll try and get some better pictures in the day time.

[CMD]

Thanks, Sam. Nice gun flints and interesting material.
I heard back from Bill Moody with photos of a close matching material from an early site he's familiar with. Bill took his photos in artificial light, but from what I can see, and from what I can't see, but Bill has told me, it's probably a match. The grey/black dot inclusions match and some areas are patinated very light, as my tool is. Bill says it has some veins, can see some larger ones. Also, what you can't see well in my tool or his is they have a dull gloss, like many flints. You can get a sense of the gloss in the upper right portion of the close up above, in this thread.  I have personally found very little rhyolite at my local spots. Felsite and hornfels, but very seldom rhyolite. It's a very common material in southeastern New England, just not at my frequent visited spots. From what I've read, many Late Paleo tools are made of rhyolite obtained regionally. In this case, the source was about 60-70 miles distant from where it was found.  Likely a Paleo tool and a pretty nice surprise.
Bill, if you read this thread, thanks!
Thanks to everyone. Hoss and Roger, your hunches and eyes see clearer then mine

[Jeffery Howle]

CMD wrote:

Thanks once more, Roger. I think I'll disagree mildly on the smaller grey piece. I think it's a small gunflint, but you know much more then me, so I disagree hesitantly, it's broken at the lower edge in the photo you reproduced. Here it is both sides. Slightly different color and it does not have the latticework of fine lines on the larger piece that you can see if enlarged. Yep, aware that extreme patina can change everything. As yet, not aware of any of the common NY flints that found their way here that look like this via weathering and patination. Going to send photos to an avocational archaeologist I know who is very good with material identification for our lithics and the exotics. Maybe he'll recognize it.
P.S. just noticed same kind of iron stain on smaller piece as larger piece, in the photo you reproduced . That really fooled me if not a gunflint because it has the smooth facets top and bottom, plus that smooth surface bevel in the 2nd photo here. If I had not asked, that would have always been a spent gunflint in my mind, now not so sure....


Here are photos showing the edge on beveled side above and last photo below, as well as edge on non-beveled side, first photo below. Got the photos all out of order, sorry bout that...

You said the little one was a spent gun flint but the one I have maybe smaller than that one


I always wondered if this one might be a gun flint

[CMD]

Thanks, Jeffery. Your first one looks like a gunflint, not sure on the second, but in fact I'm no longer sure about my little grey piece. I think Roger is probably right that it isn't. It looks like one to me, but I think it's the wrong material, it has iron staining too, so maybe it's an old tool and not a gunflint at all.
Actually, I'm not the one to ask on either of those. Maybe the one next to the dime is a scraper. I think that's what my small grey one is, and folks often confuse gunflints and scrapers anyway. I have
Jeffery wrote:


"You said the little one was a spent gun flint but the one I have maybe smaller than that one"