Hunted an old militia site today. Big copper UPDATED.NEED SOME HELP.

[CrazySlasher]

My hunting partner and I braved the heat today and hit a field that used to be a training spot for a local militia in the early 1700's. We were both hoping to pull some old coins out of there. Last visit I got a Jersey copper and a 1753 1/2 reale. It wasn't until much later after getting home that I realized I did find an oldie. I had found a couple junk metal discs close to where I found it and I just threw it in my pocket. Any ideas on the buttons? I believe they're pewter.

Edit: I cleaned up the copper a bit and can make out some lettering. It looks like ANCI (it may be an I) I can't make out the rest yet. Pictures below.

[Ads]

TreasureNet.com is the premier Treasure Hunting Forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see these ads. Please Register - It's Free!

[MUD(S.W.A.T)]

Heh, silvers cool !!

Great finds !!

Keep @ It and HH !!

[Skelly607]

Dont know what the disc is,,,,,,but it does look old.

[vayank54]

The buttons date in the 1700's probably about the rev war or so

[CrazySlasher]

The buttons date in the 1700's probably about the rev war or so

Thank you. That's what I like to read! Any examples online I could look at?

[kilmer]

Wow, way to go. Isn't it amazing how the heat seems to let up a little when you start hitting goodies.
Nice time period, keep after it. I bet there are some amazing things yet to come your way.

Don
HH

[KRAZYHORSES]

IT'S ALL GOOD I'VE GOT A COUPLE COPPERS I CAN'T ID THAT ONE LOOKS BIG WELL GOOD LUCK

[CrazySlasher]

Pics.

[CRUSADER]

The buttons date in the 1700's probably about the rev war or so

I'm not convinced, that they aren't repro, don't like the shank

[CrazySlasher]

The buttons date in the 1700's probably about the rev war or so

I'm not convinced, that they aren't repro, don't like the shank

There were two others pulled from the site in the same area. One read 21 on the back. I don't know why there would be reproductions there.

[CRUSADER]

The buttons date in the 1700's probably about the rev war or so

I'm not convinced, that they aren't repro, don't like the shank

There were two others pulled from the site in the same area. One read 21 on the back. I don't know why there would be reproductions there.

Repro's get everywhere, not difficult to explain or imagine.

We need better pictures, plus never seen a rev war button with anything written on the reverse(well at least the pewter examples). if it were 21 on the front you might have a winner

PS. They might be fine (just a few things that bother me from the norm), but at best all you could ID them as is late 18th C- Early 19th C Pewter civilian buttons (no obivious signs of military influence). Although they look a higher lead-alloy mix than most pewter types.

[CrazySlasher]

The buttons date in the 1700's probably about the rev war or so

I'm not convinced, that they aren't repro, don't like the shank

There were two others pulled from the site in the same area. One read 21 on the back. I don't know why there would be reproductions there.

Repro's get everywhere, not difficult to explain or imagine.

We need better pictures, plus never seen a rev war button with anything written on the reverse(well at least the pewter examples). if it were 21 on the front you might have a winner

PS. They might be fine (just a few things that bother me from the norm), but at best all you could ID them as is late 18th C- Early 19th C Pewter civilian buttons (no obivious signs of military influence). Although they look a higher lead-alloy mix than most pewter types.

I do understand that reproductions show up in certain places, but it is difficult to explain or imagine for me. Don't get me wrong, if these are reproductions, I wan't to know. I just don't understand how they would get there. Maybe you can educate me.

Also, what would the 21 on the back mean?

Edit: Just read your edit. I'm not too concerned with the buttons as much as I am with the coin. If they're civilian buttons, that's fine by me. If they're reproductions, that's fine with me, a bit disappointing, but it's okay.

[CRUSADER]

The buttons date in the 1700's probably about the rev war or so

I'm not convinced, that they aren't repro, don't like the shank

There were two others pulled from the site in the same area. One read 21 on the back. I don't know why there would be reproductions there.

Repro's get everywhere, not difficult to explain or imagine.

We need better pictures, plus never seen a rev war button with anything written on the reverse(well at least the pewter examples). if it were 21 on the front you might have a winner

PS. They might be fine (just a few things that bother me from the norm), but at best all you could ID them as is late 18th C- Early 19th C Pewter civilian buttons (no obvious signs of military influence). Although they look a higher lead-alloy mix than most pewter types.

I do understand that reproductions show up in certain places, but it is difficult to explain or imagine for me. Don't get me wrong, if these are reproductions, I wan't to know. I just don't understand how they would get there. Maybe you can educate me.

Also, what would the 21 on the back mean?

Edit: Just read your edit. I'm not too concerned with the buttons as much as I am with the coin. If they're civilian buttons, that's fine by me. If they're reproductions, that's fine with me, a bit disappointing, but it's okay.

OK, Repro to me could be anything produced later that looks to be older in date, so could include early 1900s but of course the obvious reenactors types turn up all over the place. Just to confuse things further some fashion types copied this type which meant anyone with a blazer could have lost it.

In my experience of 18th C buttons, the 21 on the reverse would be unique, so would need a picture of that one to understand.

[CMDiamonddawg]

the coin is possibly a Vermont copper A U C T O R I

[vayank54]

I've dug some here in VA just like the ones posted same type of shank and all. There were no repros where I dug ine. the fact that one of the buttons dug there had a 21 on the back makes me wonder though as like Crusader said. I've never seen a pewter 1700's button with anything on the back either. Repros however usually do have some numbers on the back.

[Iron Patch]

The buttons date in the 1700's probably about the rev war or so

I'm not convinced, that they aren't repro, don't like the shank

There were two others pulled from the site in the same area. One read 21 on the back. I don't know why there would be reproductions there.

if it were 21 on the front you might have a winner

Some edge loss but at least it's fairly round.

[CrazySlasher]

Here's the button w/the 21.

[CRUSADER]

Here's the button w/the 21.

theres the proof that they are not 18th C.

now maybe, you can help with why it got there it happens

[CrazySlasher]

Here's the button w/the 21.

theres the proof that they are not 18th C.

now maybe, you can help with why it got there it happens

Can you explain why that doesn't make it colonial? I don't doubt you at all. I'm just trying to educate myself on buttons. I know nothing about dating them or anything like that.

[CRUSADER]

Here's the button w/the 21.

theres the proof that they are not 18th C.

now maybe, you can help with why it got there it happens

Can you explain why that doesn't make it colonial? I don't doubt you at all. I'm just trying to educate myself on buttons. I know nothing about dating them or anything like that.

Very few 18th century buttons have any backmarks including numbers, plus the pewter/lead type that this one is copying never have any reverse marks. However, modern day copies do.
Sorry, for the kinda bad news, it was just that the buttons had many things that bothered me, compared to all the ones I find here. I thought you would rather know, than not.