Are you really on a Colonial Site?!

[1320]

Looking to get some thoughts regarding Colonial sites...seems like every other poster these days is on a Colonial site or searching for one. I see guys/gals on here popping up early 1800's artifacts and they assume/boast that it's a Colonial site. I see a few detectorists on here that think an 1850's home site is Colonial! What constitutes a Colonial site in your opinion? Didn't the Colonial Era end in the late 1700's?

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Diving for Pleasure and Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[MrMikeJackie]

Colonial comes from "colony". 1776 marks the end of "colonial" times and the beginning of America as it's own country. However, clothing, weapons, tools, currency, etc continued unchanged into the 1800's. So it is kind of a matter of opinion. I think?

 

[Iron Patch]

I think it's as simple as being anywhere you can find George coppers.... not saying that's right, just what seems to be acceptable.

 

[etex]

1802 not 1776 in Louisiana

 

[etex]

1836 in Tejas, yesterday was San Jacinto Day

 

[TheHunterGT]

Agreed with it being a "matter of opinion"...unless there is some official year marker I don't know about.

I have been to every state west of Kansas...but not a foot further east. So no colonial stuff for me sadly...or anything I would consider to be colonial anyways.

When I think of Colonial anything....the Revolutionary War is what pops into my mind first. Digging anything from that era is all but impossible here in Colorado unless somebody dropped it 100 years later.

Anything later than 1800's I put into the big "moving west" era I suppose. Gold rush....old west....Civil War. Plenty of that stuff here even if no real Civil War battles were fought here.

 

[mangum]

Kind of a loaded question. You can find mid 1800s at a colonial site that was inhabited after the period. The trouble comes when you call the finds colonial & they're not. For example, one of my best sites was inhabited 1760s - 1910s & a wide array of relics have been found. So... If I say finds from colonial site I'm really not lying.

 

[Iron Patch]

Kind of a loaded question. You can find mid 1800s at a colonial site that was inhabited after the period. The trouble comes when you call the finds colonial & they're not. For example, one of my best sites was inhabited 1760s - 1910s & a wide array of relics have been found. So... If I say finds from colonial site I'm really not lying.

Some people even take it a step further saying they are hunting a 1600s site just because the area was settled then, and what they post is all 1800s or later. I have hunted many mid. 1700s (1720s up) sites, and have finds that date to the 1600s, and even a couple to the 1500s, but have never hunted a 1600s site.

 

[pepperj]

Late 1700's few and (far between) early 1800's for my area, increased after 1812 war the area was then settled to the point that there was a noted number of settlers. So unless something had some age to it already when it was lost the term Colonial find is not filling the pouch.