Archaeologica.org

edited

I have to think that if he came up with a date of 1864 (or even 1564!) he would have told you straight off to 'forget about it'. He wouldn't be looking to double check a modern result.

Would he?

edited

If he confirms the date the Club will simply declare it a geofact....even with six or seven flakes taken off.

You know their drill by now!

One specimen might be called a geofact, but it's hard to argue that so many could be. Just stick to your guns, Charlie. The furnace may not pan out to be anything, but the abundance of other artifacts is overwhelming.
Something I did just notice about the furnace features is that they have deep gouges where they were originally carved/dug out. These appear to be made by some sort of metal tool. That type of gouge isn't typical of stone tool work. Stone tools by necessity have to take out very small portions of the rock at a time. The gouges would be smaller. I'm not sure what this means to the situation here, but it's just something I noticed. I suppose if they were iron smelters they would have some iron tools to work with. Have you found much in the area from later, historic times? If you do, then keep up with it as well as you are keeping up with the lithics. I'm still thinking these holes could be from early Texas settlers or something. I ain't ruling out anything.

edited

edited

This one looks like a shotgun shell. I don't think it would be ferrous though if it were.
[/url]

Some kind of massive alluvial event occured

Don't start that again....Arch will be thinking it is THE flood!

edited

edited

You can drive him crazy by bringing up Peleg, though

Now that's a short drive!

edited

edited

edited