Maul or Net Anchor?

[Ron Kelley]

I think this granate artifact from Central California is a maul. The man who found the artifact thinks it's a net anchor. What's your opinion? The stone is 5 1/2 inches long. The base measures 4 7/8 X 4 inches. The stone weighs 5 pounds 4.3 ounces. The stone is full grooved. I can see some damage to both ends. The larger end has some larger chips on the edge. The smaller end is very symmetrical  but the larger base has an angle to it.
Side View:

large end:

small end:

[chase]

Ron, IMHO Maul! Too big for an anchor. But what do I know. :dunno:

[gregszybala]

I think your right.

[Joel]

I say maul as well.
Anchor would show wear different.

[Jeffery Howle]

Hard to say but I would say maul also. most net weights would be smaller IMO...because they are tied on prior to throwing would be hard to throw net with this attached.

[sneakygroundbuzzard]

with the wear on both ends im gonna have to agree with the rest of the responses
  maul

[SDhunter]

Got to be a maul.  Ron,  lots of my mauls,  have some polished sides to them,  suggesting to me,  that they may have been held in their hand to some degree anyway.
That top pic,  looks like the top of the rock  shows some polished granite.

[OnewiththewilD]

o.k. heres my theory, and its based off of how big the goove is. if its a tiny groove im guessing its a net weight and they only had rope going around it.if the groove is big then they had it lashed down really good,perhaps even hafted to a handle,5 pounds isnt that heavy to drop over the side of a boat,but would be quite a heavy hammer. and if the ends are bashed that could be from it repetedly hitting the bottom? that my guess!

[Ron Kelley]

OnewiththewilD wrote:

o.k. heres my theory, and its based off of how big the goove is. if its a tiny groove im guessing its a net weight and they only had rope going around it.if the groove is big then they had it lashed down really good,perhaps even hafted to a handle,5 pounds isnt that heavy to drop over the side of a boat,but would be quite a heavy hammer. and if the ends are bashed that could be from it repetedly hitting the bottom? that my guess!

Hey Jay, I remember a picture you posted of a net setup. If I am remembering correctly they had larger stones on the two ends of the net with smaller stone on the rest of the net. Even my half pound and one pound hammers have much larger grooves.  I wanted to wait for everyone to weigh in. Do you know what thread you posted that picture in? Your theory makes a lot of sense to me.

[OnewiththewilD]

i think this is the pic,Mr.Kelley



it makes sense to me too, small groove,smaller, less significant lashing, bigger groove,more room for lashing and a more secure fit. for a net its only gotta be wide enough to keep the rope from slipping, but on a maul or axe, with all the swinging and banging being done with it, its gotta be more securly lashed.it just makes sense.

[OnewiththewilD]

the pic loaded kinda small, but it says anchor stones over the 2 big ones on the ends and net weights on the smaller middle stones.

[Ron Kelley]

Hey Jay, Thanks for posting the picture. I have one anchor and ten net weights. I just need one more anchor to complete the setup.  :laugh: