Brass Button/Gorget

[Charl]

This was found, around 1930, on the site of a 17th century Wampanoag village on the Nemasket River in Middleboro, Ma. The collector who purchased it from the finder felt that it was an English brass button made into a brass gorget by a native. Let's consider that possibility. I originally felt since many buttons have holes to begin with, how do we know a native punched those holes? An old English button from a Contact Era site seemed cool enough. Well, very recently I decided to do a google image search of "17th century English brass buttons" and realized most don't have holes at all; just a clasp on the back to string the thread though. The ones I did find with holes had 4, were not metal, and not 17th century; admittedly, not many images were returned with the search. On the side of the button with embossed floral-like designs, the holes have a raised brim. They were punched through from the back of the button, in other words. As you may notice in the back side image, the holes are ragged on their inside circumference. They are also unequal in size, one is noticeably smaller then the other hole. So I think, since it was found at a Contact Era village, with the holes punched through by hand, on a brass button that might not have holes normally, then this might in fact be just what the collector I got it from felt so certain it was, namely a small brass gorget. The clasp on the back is gone? Flattened? Both sides have a polish; the side with floral designs a high polish. 1 5/16" or 33mm in diameter.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

A History of Mining on the Kenai Peninsula, Alaska - Grab it through Amazon!

[unclemac]

nice button, a lot of manufactured items were modified for native use, but a lot of items were modified and re-used by everybody. in those days, of course, you couldn't just pop down to the wal-mart and buy a new one. Context and provenance is the key and even then...who knows...

 

[redbeardrelics]

Very interesting item Charl, and I would agree with your reasoning. It would be interesting to learn of any other artifacts found at that site, both native and European produced? I also wonder if buttons with the same hand stamped design have been found at any other dateable sites anywhere? I don't have any idea how quickly Massachusetts was colonized by Europeans, or what part of the 17th century this Wampanoag village is thought to date to, but I can't help but wonder if that button style can be linked in any way back to "the Pilgrams"?

 

[monsterrack]

Very cool Native Americans took great pride in trade items, while doing a dig with the state we found scissors, brass buttons, copper rings, iron bracelets, and a red glass cross in some burials. These where things they had never seen, that's how we got this country for a bunch of trade items, common everyday junk but fantastic items to them. While spending some time in South America I made more contacts with the locals with just cheap reading eye specs ,than I could with money.

 

[quito]

The holes seem to have been punched in similar fashion to the 1857 half dime on this post contact necklace I have.

 

[GatorBoy]

It looks like a normal horse bridle rosette.
Looks like the attachment broke off..it probably also connected to a decorative piece on the front...that's why the holes.

 

[GatorBoy]

 

[Charl]

A friend had suggested bridal rosette at one time. I favor the analysis sent by another friend recently:

Hi Charlie,

There's no reason why an English(or other European) 17th century button could not have had a pair of holes for attachment… but your button also had a soldered shank and loop made as a separate piece, and it wouldn’t have had both that and the holes. It looks to be totally hand-made and I would think the solder-work loop was its original method of attachment and that the holes were added later after the shank broke off.

The button appears to have had the shank punched into the back and then the cavity flooded with solder (rather clumsily). The over-enthusiastic punchwork has created a dome on the front face that resembles “boss-buttons” of the period. One of the pair of holes that would have held the shank (at 1 o’clock in your third picture) has been punched almost all the way through… as seen at 12 o’clock in your first picture. With a little more care and attention, that would have held the shank as securely as the usual industrial method of “cone-and-wire” soldering onto a flat back.

The decorative acanthus-like leaf/scroll-work has also been hand-applied rather clumsily… probably using an iron punch. I would suggest that it’s a coat button hand-made by an “amateur” artesan from a stamped flat sheet in imitation of what (in the UK) we call “dandy buttons”, worn by foppish gentlemen. Since it is hand-made, I don’t think you could reliably say it’s 17th Century just because it’s crude. It could equally well be 18th Century local smithwork.

It’s probably brass of the kind known as “tombac” which refers to a variety of cheap, non-tarnishing, malleable alloys (copper with a fair amount of zinc) that were much favoured for button-making. They were soft enough to easily punch designs into.

The later holes have for sure been punched through from the back but who knows why, when or by whom. You would need an iron punch for that and the difference in size of the holes might simply be the result of different amounts force being applied (since the bit on a punch is usually conical). You could also do it with an iron nail and a hammer, but round nails weren’t in common use until after about 1880. I doubt that Indians of that period would have had these tools, although someone could have done it for them. There are lots of accounts of broken metal decorative items being given to Indians in contact periods."
---------------------------------------------
Whether lost by a 17th century settler visiting the native village, whether ever used by natives, impossible to really say, as redbeardrelics suggested, I believe. I think at the least it's a salvaged button, and that's probably the only real certain thing I can say about it. I doubt the natives would have used a bridal rosette, but an Englishman could have.

 

[GatorBoy]

Well... Then...awesome gorget

 

[Charl]

Well... Then...awesome gorget

Well, I can't really say that with any certainty anymore. I thought it was a gorget, and found at a native site, but as my friend suggested, no way of knowing when the holes were punched through. It could be 18th century and postdate the village site. But, because many contact trade artifacts were found on site, it seemed a good possibility it was 17th century as well and part of the Contact Era assemblage at the site. Horses were a rare commodity at the time; natives pretty much traveled by foot and on water, as did the settlers for the most part for that matter. So, again, only certain thing appears to be "a salvaged button". I don't know how it was used or even if it was ever used as anything other then a button.

 

[Tnmountains]

I have noticed that early whites when punching a hole it was square. Same with natives no one knew how to drill a round hole in metal
It does look like a rosette or bit boss.
No way to tell it was used as a trade good really unless in association with a burial.

 

[leddel]

the button to me looks like a "Dandy" , a large designed frock or coat button made in the late 1700's
and therefor couldn't be made by natives in the 1600's . I have found many examples of these types
of buttons "modified " at colonial home sites and many with their shanks smashed flat as well. Some of these were probably reused (drilled holes to sow back on or even made into "whizzers" once they ruined for reattaching to clothing) . The button is definitely not the type of any 1600's era button that I've seen recovered
at such early sites.

 

[Charl]

the button to me looks like a "Dandy" , a large designed frock or coat button made in the late 1700's
and therefor couldn't be made by natives in the 1600's . I have found many examples of these types
of buttons "modified " at colonial home sites and many with their shanks smashed flat as well. Some of these were probably reused (drilled holes to sow back on or even made into "whizzers" once they ruined for reattaching to clothing) . The button is definitely not the type of any 1600's era button that I've seen recovered
at such early sites.

Thanks. That does clarify things as far as I'm concerned. I'll consider it 18th century and not Contact Era at all.

Tnmountains, just an aside, lots of obvious trade goods found outside a burial context. Brass points, iron axes, copper awls, etc., etc. So, trade goods don't have to be found in burial contexts to know they are trade goods. But not this button obviously.

 

[GatorBoy]

I have noticed that early whites when punching a hole it was square. Same with natives no one knew how to drill a round hole in metal
It does look like a rosette or bit boss.
No way to tell it was used as a trade good really unless in association with a burial.

^^^