Something a little different

Mark · 19th February 2005, 10:55 PM

It doesn't get much more "ethnographic" than this. Anyone know what it is? It is about 4.5" long and a little under 3" wide.

Andrew · 20th February 2005, 12:49 AM

Animal, vegetable or mineral?

fearn · 20th February 2005, 02:17 AM

What is that, the neolithic precursor to a dha?

I'm trying to decide whether it's stone or copper, or whether I'm totally clueless. Any hints?

Fearn

Mark · 20th February 2005, 02:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew

Animal, vegetable or mineral?

Mineral....

Mark · 20th February 2005, 02:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fearn

What is that, the neolithic precursor to a dha?

You could say that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by fearn

I'm trying to decide whether it's stone or copper, or whether I'm totally clueless. Any hints?

Fearn

It's older than neolithic ... and from a bit to the west of a dha.

Andrew · 20th February 2005, 04:50 AM

Chert hand axe?

Rick · 20th February 2005, 04:55 AM

A tool / axe from lump copper ?

Rivkin · 20th February 2005, 05:03 AM

pre-historic axe/knife ?

Conogre · 20th February 2005, 05:22 AM

dino-poop?

Jeff D · 20th February 2005, 05:25 AM

Hide scraper

Jeff

ariel · 20th February 2005, 06:58 AM

Is it signed by Asadullah?

Mark · 20th February 2005, 03:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Conogre

dino-poop?

LOL! I think that is what Andrew was getting at in his first post.

It is an Acheulean era hand axe or chopper found along the Omo river in Ethiopia (surface find). This is the same place were the oldest dated remains of Homo sapiens have been found, recently in the news because they were re-dated to 190,000 years ago, which I think 50 or 60,000 years older than originally thought.

This piece was not even made by a modern human, but by Homo erectus, somewhere between 1.5 million to 200,000 years ago.

tom hyle · 20th February 2005, 04:06 PM

That was my first thought, too, but isn't it small for the type?

Battara · 20th February 2005, 04:56 PM

So...I guess that means that it's not Moro.

Mark · 20th February 2005, 07:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tom hyle

That was my first thought, too, but isn't it small for the type?

Not really, if you consider the size of Homo erectus. It fits pretty nicely in my had, so I would acutally say that it is a little big. The picture is pretty much actual size. Other examples that I have handled (my Dad picked up three in the area -- I was too busy goofing around with by high school friends to look down), were about 3 inches long. I have also seen casts of some of about that size as well.

The more I look at it, the more I think I should give it to a museum, or maybe my alma mater. Its really a priceless artifact.

Radu Transylvanicus · 20th February 2005, 07:08 PM

Powhatan frisbee

Native american adze/ tool

Jim McDougall · 20th February 2005, 07:59 PM

This thread is priceless!!!!! hysterical LOL!!!

Laughter is truly the best medicine!!

fearn · 20th February 2005, 10:09 PM

Interesting! I had the same "It's a hand-axe, no, wait, it's too small" reaction.

Not that I'm arguing. The one hand axe I got to handle in Anthropology way back when was a bit bigger than my hand, or about twice the size of the example you've got here. It was also right handed, something I noticed as a leftie...

Yours is also missing the point that I saw on the other one.

Oh well, at least it shows that they weren't standardizing their knives even then

Neat blade!

Fearn

Andrew · 21st February 2005, 02:41 AM

I guessed hand axe first! It's probably not chert, though.

Conogre · 21st February 2005, 02:57 AM

My favorite response was: "So...I guess that means that it's not Moro."
Priceless!!!!
On the serious side, I keep watching as they have to keep going back and revising tool abilities and such, not only on early humans, but proto-humans and even animals.
Recent information seems to suggest that we humans may not even have a monopoly on serial killings, with the animal culprit being.....................Flipper!!!!!!
Is nothing sacred any longer?
Ooops...there goes serious.
Sorry

Battara · 21st February 2005, 02:37 PM

If you want sacred, maybe it is for circumcision.

ariel · 21st February 2005, 08:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Battara

If you want sacred, maybe it is for circumcision.

.... and if there was a surgical mishap, this Homo would not be Erectus anymore.
Andrew, do not have your lawyerly juices getting too hot: even in Ethiopia the statue of limitations is shorter than 2 mln years.

Andrew · 21st February 2005, 08:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ariel

.... and if there was a surgical mishap, this Homo would not be Erectus anymore.
Andrew, do not have your lawyerly juices getting too hot: even in Ethiopia the statue of limitations is shorter than 2 mln years.

No problem here, Ariel. Despite what doctors say, malpractice lawyers do have a sense of humor. Besides, I'm used to your bad jokes.

(Now Mike, Radu and the rest...

).

19th February 2005, 10:55 PM	#1
Mark Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 987	Something a little different It doesn't get much more "ethnographic" than this. Anyone know what it is? It is about 4.5" long and a little under 3" wide. Attached Images

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

20th February 2005, 12:49 AM	#2
Andrew Member Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: USA Posts: 1,725	Animal, vegetable or mineral?

20th February 2005, 02:17 AM	#3
fearn Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 1,247	What is that, the neolithic precursor to a dha? I'm trying to decide whether it's stone or copper, or whether I'm totally clueless. Any hints? Fearn

20th February 2005, 04:50 AM	#6
Andrew Member Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: USA Posts: 1,725	Chert hand axe?

20th February 2005, 04:55 AM	#7
Rick Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 6,293	A tool / axe from lump copper ?

20th February 2005, 05:03 AM	#8
Rivkin Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 655	pre-historic axe/knife ?

20th February 2005, 05:22 AM	#9
Conogre Member Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Clearwater, Florida Posts: 371	dino-poop?

20th February 2005, 05:25 AM	#10
Jeff D Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: B.C. Canada Posts: 473	Hide scraper Jeff

20th February 2005, 06:58 AM	#11
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	Is it signed by Asadullah?

20th February 2005, 04:06 PM	#13
tom hyle Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Houston, TX, USA Posts: 1,254	That was my first thought, too, but isn't it small for the type?

20th February 2005, 04:56 PM	#14
Battara EAAF Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Louisville, KY Posts: 7,221	So...I guess that means that it's not Moro.

20th February 2005, 07:08 PM	#16
Radu Transylvanicus Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: 2008-2010 Bali, 1998-2008 USA Posts: 271	Powhatan frisbee Native american adze/ tool

20th February 2005, 07:59 PM	#17
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 9,946	This thread is priceless!!!!! hysterical LOL!!! Laughter is truly the best medicine!!

20th February 2005, 10:09 PM	#18
fearn Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 1,247	Interesting! I had the same "It's a hand-axe, no, wait, it's too small" reaction. Not that I'm arguing. The one hand axe I got to handle in Anthropology way back when was a bit bigger than my hand, or about twice the size of the example you've got here. It was also right handed, something I noticed as a leftie... Yours is also missing the point that I saw on the other one. Oh well, at least it shows that they weren't standardizing their knives even then Neat blade! Fearn

21st February 2005, 02:41 AM	#19
Andrew Member Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: USA Posts: 1,725	I guessed hand axe first! It's probably not chert, though.

21st February 2005, 02:57 AM	#20
Conogre Member Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Clearwater, Florida Posts: 371	My favorite response was: "So...I guess that means that it's not Moro." Priceless!!!! On the serious side, I keep watching as they have to keep going back and revising tool abilities and such, not only on early humans, but proto-humans and even animals. Recent information seems to suggest that we humans may not even have a monopoly on serial killings, with the animal culprit being.....................Flipper!!!!!! Is nothing sacred any longer? Ooops...there goes serious. Sorry

21st February 2005, 02:37 PM	#21
Battara EAAF Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Louisville, KY Posts: 7,221	If you want sacred, maybe it is for circumcision.