🥇 BANNER Colonial Watering hole deja vu ...ANOTHER EARLY SILVER RING...AND CHECK THIS ONE OUT!

HomeGuardDan

Bronze Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2011
Messages
1,677
Reaction score
2,473
Golden Thread
5
Location
Williamsburg, VA
🥇 Banner finds
5
Primary Interest:
All Treasure Hunting
Well I am a sad but dedicated soul. It was cold and windy (30mph sustained winds) this morning, but the water temps are warmer then the air, so I said "lets roll."

It was downright miserable and I probably was second guessing myself every minute until I made it back to the same hole that produced the other early silver ring and cob that I recovered earlier this week. As soon as I declined down into it I heard an iffy signal and after a few minutes of work on the bottom, up surfaced this beauty! Another early silver hand-etched ring! This one has overlapping hearts and similar etchings as the one that I recovered earlier in the week. I have to believe they belonged to the same person as they were 5' apart and are very similar in design and construction. I did have my first ring verified that it was no newer than 1700s and most likely 1600's with a chance of 1400-1500s. One person even said earlier than that. I was stunned to say the least and my hearts "pun intended" warmed my body! ha ha

After that excitement, the cold set back in and a few additional finds surfaced before I finally called it quits...it even snowed on me...I mean really?

Other finds include a civil war eagle cuff button, a colonial flat button another civil war three ringer and a handful of other 1700-1600's lead musket balls and shot. This site had a small amount of civil war activity which is why a random CW find is made from time to time, but the vast majority is 1700s-1600s with the mean date being the late 1600's.

I thought I had another cob, but it turned out to be a piece of pewter that read fairly high.

I am stoked on the rings as they might be my best finds of the summer and a pair that will display nice together!

HH

Dan
 

Attachments

  • 1a.webp
    1a.webp
    627 KB · Views: 752
  • 1b.webp
    1b.webp
    107.3 KB · Views: 643
  • 1c.webp
    1c.webp
    126 KB · Views: 593
  • 1da.webp
    1da.webp
    142.9 KB · Views: 582
  • 1d.webp
    1d.webp
    165.1 KB · Views: 670
  • 1e.webp
    1e.webp
    140.5 KB · Views: 572
  • 1f.webp
    1f.webp
    96.2 KB · Views: 571
  • 1g.webp
    1g.webp
    297.4 KB · Views: 522
  • 1h.webp
    1h.webp
    410.2 KB · Views: 480
  • 1i.webp
    1i.webp
    450.9 KB · Views: 515
Upvote 76
Colonial Watering hole deja vu ...ANOTHER EARLY SILVER RING...AND CHECK THIS ...

Oh my goodness Dan?! I wound venture to say a matching pair? Is the sizing the same?

Dan, I'm so friggin' jealous on that first ring but two?!?! I'm so happy you found the match (IMHO). In my limited experience in rings I would say it's same period and are both likely 1600-early 1700's. Wow, I have to vote banner. Seriously, wow, I hope others feel the same.

Steve
 

Very nice. No doubt the lead has been in the water. It will look like it was dropped yesterday. The rings are super . It was cherry spot I am thinking any of those targets were pretty high on the scale :thumbsup: Nice hunt Dan!
 

Banner vote just sent. Never seen one of these posted before, and 2 from the same site make these finds incredibly rare and intriguing. WTG man!!
 

Oh my goodness Dan?! I wound venture to say a matching pair? Is the sizing the same?

Dan, I'm so friggin' jealous on that first ring but two?!?! I'm so happy you found the match (IMHO). In my limited experience in rings I would say it's same period and are both likely 1600-early 1700's. Wow, I have to vote banner. Seriously, wow, I hope others feel the same.

Steve

Thanks man. The sizes are close but a little different which would not surprise me as multiple fngers was the trend during that period. Considering the amount of items I have pulled from this place over the years and these are the only two rings of this kind to surface (really rings period other than a brass band or two) and with them being 5' apart, ID say they belonged to the same owner.

They really are cool and will display well together and truly are works of art.
 

Oh my goodness Dan?! I wound venture to say a matching pair? Is the sizing the same?

Dan, I'm so friggin' jealous on that first ring but two?!?! I'm so happy you found the match (IMHO). In my limited experience in rings I would say it's same period and are both likely 1600-early 1700's. Wow, I have to vote banner. Seriously, wow, I hope others feel the same.

Steve

Thanks. It still will keep producing and has a few more exciting finds out there waiting to be made.
 

Banner vote just sent. Never seen one of these posted before, and 2 from the same site make these finds incredibly rare and intriguing. WTG man!!

Thanks man...they are indeed cool finds and can't wait to show them to you in person ... Even more cool to hold.
 

Your other finds are neat in and of themselves, but the two handmade, hand-etched rings are fantastic finds. I love the artifacts with a story and these are great ones. The only thing better would be to be able to find out who they belonged to, or the family that lived there during that period. But my imagination can easily fill in the blanks with them as they are.
I think they are Banner worthy as is, your date verification makes them a lock as far as I am concerned. (As good as gold, better to me) Great to see them! Great recovery! HH.
 

Your other finds are neat in and of themselves, but the two handmade, hand-etched rings are fantastic finds. I love the artifacts with a story and these are great ones. The only thing better would be to be able to find out who they belonged to, or the family that lived there during that period. But my imagination can easily fill in the blanks with them as they are.
I think they are Banner worthy as is, your date verification makes them a lock as far as I am concerned. (As good as gold, better to me) Great to see them! Great recovery! HH.

Thanks man. This was a wharf site so could be from those that lived at the house above, or the sailor that left London, Cadiz, etc for the new world.
 

I haven't read through this thread, so not sure if time frame has been mentioned... assume into the 1800s, maybe well into them... but regardless of that they are both fantastic finds.
 

I haven't read through this thread, so not sure if time frame has been mentioned... assume into the 1800s, maybe well into them... but regardless of that they are both fantastic finds.

Iron, they are 1600's and perhaps earlier. Though I suspect 1600s to early 1700s
 

Holy crud Dan, those belong in a museum! My vote is going in right now.
 

Dan - Congrats on a 2nd ring! :notworthy: While it's not the same thing, the hearts design on your ring reminds me of the 17thC Charles II marriage commemoration buttons that are found in England. I think the style of a two hearts design might have been a trend supporting your date - 17th century. The buttons can be see have way down the page for the attached link - Colchester Treasure Hunting.

Silverbuttons

Fantastic Find x's 2. Is this a fresh water source? If it was salt water, did you have silver sulfide that needed removing? The rings weathered the elements so well, I should reconsider some salt water sites up my way.
 

Dan - Congrats on a 2nd ring! :notworthy: While it's not the same thing, the hearts design on your ring reminds me of the 17thC Charles II marriage commemoration buttons that are found in England. I think the style of a two hearts design might have been a trend supporting your date - 17th century. The buttons can be see have way down the page for the attached link - Colchester Treasure Hunting.

Silverbuttons

Fantastic Find x's 2. Is this a fresh water source? If it was salt water, did you have silver sulfide that needed removing? The rings weathered the elements so well, I should reconsider some salt water sites up my way.

I actually was thinking the same about the coronation meaning, but was not 100% sure.

I will shoot you a PM about the other info.
 

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom