Kangaroo Tooth Lacerator

David · 31st August 2010, 02:52 AM

Those teeth look rather flat and pointed. I'm not sure they fit the profile for kangaroo teeth. I would more likely think shark.
Here are the skulls of 2 different types of kangaroo.

Ron Anderson · 31st August 2010, 03:13 AM

Hi David

You could be right. I did initially think these were Shark's Teeth. I changed my mind after looking at shark's teeth, but this could be a different type I haven't spotted.

I have noticed that the teeth on the kangaroo implements I saw in the museum were pretty sharp. It is possible it was constructed of just the incisors from these animals. That would mean killing more kangaroos, of course, but there are plenty of those in Australia, so no problem there.

If they are shark's teeth, this would change the location of this artefact from central Australia to Queensland. This is a bit surprising because of the ochre on the item which I associate with central Australia more.

Regardless, the weapon still seems to have disappeared a century or so ago.

I suspect, as much as anything, it simply became obsolete as European implements became more readily accessible. A lot of work must have gone into making this - I suspect, the process of preparing the cement (for want of a better word) was pretty laborious.

It looks primitive, this knife. But it's pretty well made. Nonetheless, it has a limited function. It can't really be used for anything other than fighting. It seems to have been an implement carried almost exclusively by young men – a kind of indigenous Australian switchblade, if you like.

Ron Anderson · 31st August 2010, 03:36 AM

Hi David

This is the best close up of the teeth I can manage.

There are little striations on the both sides of each tooth, which you may not be able to see on the photo.

If you look at Tim's reference posted here you'll see the item there described as "kangaroo tooth" lacerator too. Those teeth look similar to those of my knife.

But that could be wrong. I don't know.

Ron

Tim Simmons · 31st August 2010, 05:28 PM

Ron thanks for the pictures. Love that knife of yours, beautiful work. Something I find most interesting. Look at the knife blades in the colour pictures I post, how modern and similar in form to steel forged and ground blades, reminding me of Pukko knives.

The teeth on the lacerator are most probably as stated "Kangeroo" just ground to the desired point.

VANDOO · 31st August 2010, 06:57 PM

I HAVE INCLUDED A PICTURE OF A BARACUDA JAW USED IN HAWAII FOR SCARIFICATION. THE AUSTRALIAN ABORIGINALS ALSO PRACTICED SCARIFICATION AND IT IS A SOURCE OF PRIDE TO SHOW THEIR TRIBAL SCARS, SEE PICTURE. MOST AUSTRALIAN TRIBES I KNOW OF USED SPEARS AND SHIELDS ALONG WITH THROWING CLUBS AND STRIKING CLUBS AS THEIR PRIMARY WEAPONS. IF A TRIBE HAD ONLY A SMALL WEAPON SUCH AS THE ONE YOU HAVE THEY WOULD NOT HAVE FARED WELL IN BATTLE. SO PERHAPS IT IS MOSTLY FOR USE IN RITUAL AND PERHAPS COULD BE USED FOR SCARIFICATION WHICH WAS VERY IMPORTANT IN THE AUSTRALIAN TRIBES. JUST A POSSIBILITY

MOST FISH AND LIZZARD TEETH TEND TO BE MORE FLATTENED WHILE THOSE FROM MAMMALS TEND TO BE MORE ROUND. I AM NOT SURE IF THERE ARE ANY LARGE FRESHWATER FISH IN AUSTRALIA THAT HAVE LARGE TEETH. THE GOANNA MONITOR LIZZARD WOULD HAVE LARGE TEETH. THERE ARE PLENTY OF MARSUPIALS IN AUSTRALIA AS WELL AS KANGAROO TO CHECK FOR COMPARISONS. THANKS FOR POSTING A VERY UNUSUAL AND INTERESTING ITEM. GOOD LUCK

VANDOO · 31st August 2010, 08:44 PM

DUGONG 8 TO 10 FEET LONG LARGEST CAUGHT 13.2 FEET LONG. SKULL 16 IN. LONG X 9IN. WIDE X 9.5 IN. HIGH. IT IS SAID TO BE THE SMALLEST OF THE SIRENIANS THE MANATEE IS LARGER BUT LACKS TUSKS.

HIPPO OVER TWO TONS. THIS SKULL MEASURES 30IN. LONG X 20 IN WIDE X 20 IN HIGH. SOME ARE NO DOUBT LARGER.

THE TOOTH SHOWN APPEARS TO BE 12INCHES LONG THE LONGEST MEASUREMENT OF AN ADULT MALE DUGONG SKULL IS 16 IN. I PERSONALLY WOULD GO WITH HIPPO.

THE DUGONG IS RELATED TO THE ELEPHANT AND IT IS EASY TO SEE A SIMULARITY IN THE SKULL. PIC. OF ELEPHANT SKULL WITH TUSKS AND PICTURE OF FOSSIL DWARF MAMMOTH SKULL, THE ORIGIN OF THE CYCLOPS LEGENDS.

Ron Anderson · 1st September 2010, 01:15 AM

Hi Tim

It is possible this knife may also have been used for scarification, however I don't think this was a primary function at all. It was a fighting knife. Aborigines had other tools specifically for the purpose of scarification etc. These were mainly stone blades. I've included a photo of one here (see below) - another item in my growing collection of aboriginal artefacts. It's called a leira blade. It would have been used for scarification, sub-incision and other surgical tasks. And of course also as a spear head.

Regarding your tooth: I recently had the good fortune to attend an auction with a lot of marine ivory, including entire walrus tusks. In fact, I purchased some Innuit tools made from walrus ivory, including an ivory eskimo harpoon blade. There is something about your tooth that suggests marine ivory. I think it might be the smoothness of the surface - perhaps this is owing to the erosive nature of water on a tooth. I would put my money on the fact that this came from a sea mammal like a dugong. Of course, hippos also spend a lot of time in water, so I may be wrong.

31st August 2010, 02:52 AM	#1
David Keris forum moderator Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Nova Scotia Posts: 7,229	Those teeth look rather flat and pointed. I'm not sure they fit the profile for kangaroo teeth. I would more likely think shark. Here are the skulls of 2 different types of kangaroo. Attached Images

31st August 2010, 03:36 AM	#3
Ron Anderson Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Sydney Australia Posts: 228	Hi David This is the best close up of the teeth I can manage. There are little striations on the both sides of each tooth, which you may not be able to see on the photo. If you look at Tim's reference posted here you'll see the item there described as "kangaroo tooth" lacerator too. Those teeth look similar to those of my knife. But that could be wrong. I don't know. Ron Attached Images

31st August 2010, 06:57 PM	#5
VANDOO (deceased) Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: OKLAHOMA, USA Posts: 3,138	I HAVE INCLUDED A PICTURE OF A BARACUDA JAW USED IN HAWAII FOR SCARIFICATION. THE AUSTRALIAN ABORIGINALS ALSO PRACTICED SCARIFICATION AND IT IS A SOURCE OF PRIDE TO SHOW THEIR TRIBAL SCARS, SEE PICTURE. MOST AUSTRALIAN TRIBES I KNOW OF USED SPEARS AND SHIELDS ALONG WITH THROWING CLUBS AND STRIKING CLUBS AS THEIR PRIMARY WEAPONS. IF A TRIBE HAD ONLY A SMALL WEAPON SUCH AS THE ONE YOU HAVE THEY WOULD NOT HAVE FARED WELL IN BATTLE. SO PERHAPS IT IS MOSTLY FOR USE IN RITUAL AND PERHAPS COULD BE USED FOR SCARIFICATION WHICH WAS VERY IMPORTANT IN THE AUSTRALIAN TRIBES. JUST A POSSIBILITY MOST FISH AND LIZZARD TEETH TEND TO BE MORE FLATTENED WHILE THOSE FROM MAMMALS TEND TO BE MORE ROUND. I AM NOT SURE IF THERE ARE ANY LARGE FRESHWATER FISH IN AUSTRALIA THAT HAVE LARGE TEETH. THE GOANNA MONITOR LIZZARD WOULD HAVE LARGE TEETH. THERE ARE PLENTY OF MARSUPIALS IN AUSTRALIA AS WELL AS KANGAROO TO CHECK FOR COMPARISONS. THANKS FOR POSTING A VERY UNUSUAL AND INTERESTING ITEM. GOOD LUCK Attached Images

31st August 2010, 08:44 PM	#6
VANDOO (deceased) Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: OKLAHOMA, USA Posts: 3,138	DUGONG 8 TO 10 FEET LONG LARGEST CAUGHT 13.2 FEET LONG. SKULL 16 IN. LONG X 9IN. WIDE X 9.5 IN. HIGH. IT IS SAID TO BE THE SMALLEST OF THE SIRENIANS THE MANATEE IS LARGER BUT LACKS TUSKS. HIPPO OVER TWO TONS. THIS SKULL MEASURES 30IN. LONG X 20 IN WIDE X 20 IN HIGH. SOME ARE NO DOUBT LARGER. THE TOOTH SHOWN APPEARS TO BE 12INCHES LONG THE LONGEST MEASUREMENT OF AN ADULT MALE DUGONG SKULL IS 16 IN. I PERSONALLY WOULD GO WITH HIPPO. THE DUGONG IS RELATED TO THE ELEPHANT AND IT IS EASY TO SEE A SIMULARITY IN THE SKULL. PIC. OF ELEPHANT SKULL WITH TUSKS AND PICTURE OF FOSSIL DWARF MAMMOTH SKULL, THE ORIGIN OF THE CYCLOPS LEGENDS. Attached Images Last edited by VANDOO; 1st September 2010 at 03:40 AM.

1st September 2010, 01:15 AM	#7
Ron Anderson Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Sydney Australia Posts: 228	Hi Tim It is possible this knife may also have been used for scarification, however I don't think this was a primary function at all. It was a fighting knife. Aborigines had other tools specifically for the purpose of scarification etc. These were mainly stone blades. I've included a photo of one here (see below) - another item in my growing collection of aboriginal artefacts. It's called a leira blade. It would have been used for scarification, sub-incision and other surgical tasks. And of course also as a spear head. Regarding your tooth: I recently had the good fortune to attend an auction with a lot of marine ivory, including entire walrus tusks. In fact, I purchased some Innuit tools made from walrus ivory, including an ivory eskimo harpoon blade. There is something about your tooth that suggests marine ivory. I think it might be the smoothness of the surface - perhaps this is owing to the erosive nature of water on a tooth. I would put my money on the fact that this came from a sea mammal like a dugong. Of course, hippos also spend a lot of time in water, so I may be wrong. Attached Images

31st August 2010, 03:13 AM	#2
Ron Anderson Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Sydney Australia Posts: 228	Hi David You could be right. I did initially think these were Shark's Teeth. I changed my mind after looking at shark's teeth, but this could be a different type I haven't spotted. I have noticed that the teeth on the kangaroo implements I saw in the museum were pretty sharp. It is possible it was constructed of just the incisors from these animals. That would mean killing more kangaroos, of course, but there are plenty of those in Australia, so no problem there. If they are shark's teeth, this would change the location of this artefact from central Australia to Queensland. This is a bit surprising because of the ochre on the item which I associate with central Australia more. Regardless, the weapon still seems to have disappeared a century or so ago. I suspect, as much as anything, it simply became obsolete as European implements became more readily accessible. A lot of work must have gone into making this - I suspect, the process of preparing the cement (for want of a better word) was pretty laborious. It looks primitive, this knife. But it's pretty well made. Nonetheless, it has a limited function. It can't really be used for anything other than fighting. It seems to have been an implement carried almost exclusively by young men – a kind of indigenous Australian switchblade, if you like.

31st August 2010, 05:28 PM	#4
Tim Simmons Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: What is still UK Posts: 5,875	Ron thanks for the pictures. Love that knife of yours, beautiful work. Something I find most interesting. Look at the knife blades in the colour pictures I post, how modern and similar in form to steel forged and ground blades, reminding me of Pukko knives. The teeth on the lacerator are most probably as stated "Kangeroo" just ground to the desired point.