Bill Kasper wrote:
> paul, i'd just say this:
>
> On May 13, 2013, at 3:08 AM, paul womack  wrote:
>
>> should I just accept "that it is what it is", find out what it
>> does (speed of cut, wear rate, quality of edge)
>> and not worry about it?
>
> > unless there are markings, it's tough to say anything about its history.  th
at said, i await your pictures.

Some more googly-reading make me strongly suspect I have a Washita of some kind;
there is some pink/red tint there (although I can't rule out rusted swarf at thi
s stage)
and the stone in the used area is distinctly open textured.

It's hard as hell to flatten, so the "fresh" area is still quite small.

To the pictures:
Both pictures were taken in the evening, in an east facing room, with most of th
e light
coming from incandescent lamps. For both shots, I first introduced a white card,
 and performed
manual white point setting on my camera. The colours are (thus) as accurate
as I know how to get.

Here's one end of the (2"x8") stone, showing some used/dished area, and the new
area exposed by initial flattening work. The new area has not been wetted
with oil or water.

http://galootcentral.com/components/cpgalbums/userpics/10152/stone_overall.jpg

I note a mottled appearance, and embedded swarf in the "used" area..

The blue square is where the "texture" close up is taken

http://galootcentral.com/components/cpgalbums/userpics/10152/stone_texture.jpg

That (to me) looks like pure novaculite, but with holes, which is Washita (or so
ft Arkansas).
Further examination of the used area uncder a 10x hand lens revealed a texture
with holes, very much  like the one pictured in my first post.

  BugBear
------------------------------------------------------------------------