Cross Belt buckle & more

[sscindercoop]

Cross Belt buckle & more

These are my finds from my last two hunts. I believe the buckle to be Rev War era. Thanks for looking HH

 

[kevkirki]

Re: Cross Belt buckle & more

very nice....great video... congrats

 

[kieser sousa/rip]

Re: Cross Belt buckle & more

I find this type of buckle at mostly colonial sites myself.I did an image search for "revelutionary buckles" on google but couldent find much so I added the word bikini and found my search to be much more interesting.

 

[K Zack]

Re: Cross Belt buckle & more

Great Finds,
As for the Great Buckle Debate, Why is it that this type of Buckle could not have served many purposes in different times and locations?
As someone already said, Dating the site is the key to this one.
The only thing that I know for sure about our Ancestors is, They were very good at Improvising!
Just my 2 cents.
Kevin

 

[flakefinder]

Re: Cross Belt buckle & more

That's one nice IH penny, I love this site I sure learn a lot from everyone on here , nothing better then a debate over the old things

 

[Silver Searcher]

Re: Cross Belt buckle & more



I think we are right on the edge hear regarding date. Brass Buckles with iron bars were introduced in the 18thc, due to the fact that different component parts of buckles were made from different manufacturesrs. That actuall Buckle style dates back to the 1600s but would have been of Bronze...so could go either way.

SS

 

[relicminer]

Re: Cross Belt buckle & more

Good vid, great pics, awesome finds!!!

 

[Steve in PA]

Re: Cross Belt buckle & more

Very interesting debate on these buckles. I have never dug one. I have dug a lot of colonial sites and I have dug a lot of mid 1800s sites. I really think it curious that I have never seen one dug from a civil war site. Lots of horse tack is found on Civil War sites. Since I don't have any experience digging these buckles, I lean toward Don Trioni's opinion. He has studied lots of period paintings to get the equipment correct for his paintings.

 

[yotman1]

Double post sorry!

 

[yotman1]

Sorry to disagree with Don Troiani on anything BUT I have dug about 20 of these buckles. The batwings with the points are earlier AND all of them I have dug except for a few with the rounded points have been dug entirely at mid to late 18th century homesteads and INSIDE the homestead. They are usually just not randomly found as the many oxen shoes we find and buttons that we find are. I know Bob well and agree with him. We live in upstate NY in an historical area where MANY Rev War and War of 1812 soldiers fought and subsequently homesteaded. I have one batwing that is hand dated 1702 that was found at an old homestead 3/4 of a mile in the woods - a huge Dutch shoe buckle was found at the same site. Based on what I find and where I find them I just think Don is wrong on this one. By the way Bob and Don know each other well.

 

[Bill D. (VA)]

I just finished reading through this thread about the buckle controversy and thought I'd chime in. I'm not taking anyone's side with this - just presenting a few facts plus my own personal experiences. First, I've hunted literally hundreds of colonial sites over the last 20 years, and many were not occupied post-1800. Out of the thousands of recoveries I've made, I've never dug a buckle like the one posted here. The only one that has even a remote resemblance is pictured below, and that dates to the 17th or very early 18th century. IMO, the authoritative and most comprehensive book on early buckles is "Buckles 1250-1800" by Whitehead, and out of the hundreds shown, none are like the one posted here. Additionally, in another very credible reference book, "Collector's Illustrated Encyclopedia of the American Revolution" by Neumann & Kravic, none like the one posted are shown. Since these buckles are commonly found by some of the folks here, the only conclusion you can draw is that the buckle must be post-1800. Otherwise they would certainly appear in these books. What must be happening is that the "colonial" sites where these are being found were occupied well into the 19th century, and these buckles are coming from that later period. No other plausible explanation.

 

[yotman1]

Bill - that may be true BUT most of the sites that I dig were homesteaded by former soldiers. This area included Albany, Rensselaer, Saratoga, Schoharie, Shenectady, Washington, Otsego and Montgomery counties in New York. A place where MANY battles, settlements and homesteads from the French and Indian Wars through the War of 1812 took place. Not sure what else I can say. These have almost always been found INSIDE the old foundation, pile of rocks, cellar or whatever you want to call it and NOT randomly outside or even in the old barn areas. Just wondering why they would typically be found only inside the homes. My experience is that tack or harness buckles were made of iron. As Is said in an earlier post I have found about 20 of them in various sizes from large 3" or so to small 1" - 2" ones. AND I have one that was long ago hand dated 1702!

 

[BuckleBoy]

1. no one ever said that this buckle was a military find. Comments on the era are independent of explicit military use.
2. they appear to be a Northeast phenomenon in the U.S.
3. they are dug in late 1700s/early 1800s sites

I personally think that they're horse tack from the late 1700s or at the latest, the Federal era. Look at the UKFD and see that it also got the "u-shaped piece" wrong (said "furniture hardware" but it was really a strap tie down from a Federal Era saddle). I think that the problem here is that we don't have many Federal Era or Late Colonial Era saddles surviving--or perhaps any!

-Buck

 

[trdking]

Great digs coop , the 1875 indianhead is in tremendous condition and the rev. war era buckle is over the top the pics are top notch , what camera do you use ?

dawg

The soil was very kind on this copper

 

[Ed (Upstate NY)]

Gorgeous Indian head cent. Two years newer and you would be sitting on a nice chunk of change !!! Still has to be a $100.00 coin !

 

[yotman1]

I have found many of these - Please read my other post. 90% of them have been found INSIDE a cellar hole, on a pile of rocks that was a foundation for a cabin and so on. I have detected such site for years. These are NOT new sites and NO modern 'stuff' is found at them. See my recent post on my Washington button find. We have found 6 large cents at the site, 17 _ _ , 1810, 3 X 1817 and an 1818. We found 8 - 1/2 dollar sized colonial coat buttons [three silver plated] tombac buttons, a couple of musket parts, and so on. I also found ON the pile of rocks a small 2" rounded corner batwing - dates the batwing I'd say. Sorry but despite what others have stated here these are NOT buckles used for oxen and so on. They are almost always found inside the cellar/foundation/pile of rocks here in the northeast. This is very typical. The pointed ones that I have found - over 20 of them have all been found at sites with relics from the early to late 1700's. At one site I also found a 1694 William and Mary 1/2 penny, a 1696 William III penny, 1797 large cent and large dutch kitchen-type fireplace swing arm, etc AND 6 Pointed Batwing buckles - every one was INSIDE the cellar/foundation, these were from a tiny 2" one to large 4-5 inch ones. Another 'tell' is what the cellar/foundation looks like. If it is shallow with a dutch-style center fireplace and 1' or so high walls it is OLD! At another pile of rocks over 1/2 mile back in the woods I found numerous flat buttons, a huge dutch brass over iron shoe buckle and a rounded pointed Batwing hand dated 1702!! I would suggest that these and many more similar stories are great 'provenance'. Oh another thing - none of these cellars appeared on any map = starting with the 1829 map > 1854 > 1862 > 1876 etc They were already out of use prior to the earliest map.

 

[prolab69]

i found a few of those buckles, I believe they fall in the same area as the infamous "bat wing" buckle. Yes they look a bit primitive, but in reality their only from aprox 1840-50.

 

[yotman1]

My post is about Batwing Buckles!

 

[johnnyblaze]

Those buckles certainly do look Colonial..Definately nowhere near 1900's..

~Blaze~