✅ SOLVED Small button with fouled anchor

[baytraderbutch]

Can anyone help me identify this button. Its brass and has the remains of a ring on the back. It was found in an area where I have been finding coins from the mid 1800s up to modern coins. The material is a dredge pile from the MS Sound. There was a naval battle just days before the Battle Of New Orleans near here and activity during the civil war. Any help would be appreciated. This is my first post with a photo so lets see how it worked out. The button is very dark with a lot a wear or so it appears.
Thanks

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Agony and Death on a Gold Rush Steamer: The Disastrous Sinking of the Side-Wheeler Yankee Blade - Grab it through Amazon!

[CRUSADER]

I spotted to with out trying, perhaps you better take another look.

So you emailed them as well?

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Family Maps of Hinds County, Mississippi, Deluxe Edition - Grab it through Amazon!

[Silver Searcher]

So you emailed them as well?

I never use the site as a reference, and to be honest if the ID site is like there digs, then it's all fake.

SS

 

[CRUSADER]

I never use the site as a reference, and to be honest if the ID site is like there digs, then it's all fake.

SS

So stop starting with me, we are both one the same side. I have no issue with you...

 

[Silver Searcher]

So stop starting with me, we are both one the same side. I have no issue with you...

Why have I got a issue all I said was did you put them right...were is the issue

SS

 

[romeo-1]

I think I would defer to Iron Patch on this one...as I would for most button and coin ID requests. I've found the same button and my research, as directed by IP pointed me towards the merchant navy...and as stated, Colchester is notoriously unreliable and probably should not be used as "expert" source material...

 

[CRUSADER]

OK, I thought I would get a UK military button expert to give his view:

'A very basic design, the back mark (if any) could help with a reasonable dating. In brief this style of button was worn by Midshipmen in the late 18th and early 19th centuries. It was also used by Royal Naval Warrant officers and indeed lesser ranks when wearing the short length 'pea-jacket' on shore. As the fame of the Royal Navy in the early 19th century gripped the public's interest and enthusiasm this pattern began to appear on civilian dress. It is also fairly safe to say that the lower ranks of the Mercantile Marine wore the same pattern. In short it became a 'universal' maritime pattern.'

 

[Iron Patch]

OK, I thought I would get a UK military button expert to give his view:

'A very basic design, the back mark (if any) could help with a reasonable dating. In brief this style of button was worn by Midshipmen in the late 18th and early 19th centuries. It was also used by Royal Naval Warrant officers and indeed lesser ranks when wearing the short length 'pea-jacket' on shore. As the fame of the Royal Navy in the early 19th century gripped the public's interest and enthusiasm this pattern began to appear on civilian dress. It is also fairly safe to say that the lower ranks of the Mercantile Marine wore the same pattern. In short it became a 'universal' maritime pattern.'

That's a fairly thorough reply, and I can see how it makes sense because they are fairly common, but the one problem I have is anyone who I would consider to be an expert on these should know none of them ever have a backmark of any type. So I'd like to know how much of that is fact and how much of it is just what he believes. I can see him being right though.

PS: I used to see posts from Canadians calling them Provincial Marine.


Anyway, I think we're at least on our way to knowing what they are. If mine were easier to get at I'd post em up!

 

[romeo-1]

Here's mine...front and back.

 

[Iron Patch]

Here's mine...front and back.

My first came from the Rosa Hill, Fall of 2000 I think it was.

 

[romeo-1]

My first came from the Rosa Hill, Fall of 2000 I think it was.

Mine came from the site where you found the three cannonballs...just at the edge of the second field...

 

[Iron Patch]

Mine came from the site where you found the three cannonballs...just at the edge of the second field...

You mean where I almost found them. But I think you mixed them up because there you dug a misc. anchor button that I think is probably some sort of shipping button, and wasn't it up West you found the one you just posted? Where the owner gave us a drive in the back of the truck.

 

[romeo-1]

You mean where I almost found them. But I think you mixed them up because there you dug a misc. anchor button that I think is probably some sort of shipping button, and wasn't it up West you found the one you just posted? Where the owner gave us a drive in the back of the truck.

Yep...you're right!

 

[CRUSADER]

That's a fairly thorough reply, and I can see how it makes sense because they are fairly common, but the one problem I have is anyone who I would consider to be an expert on these should know none of them ever have a backmark of any type. So I'd like to know how much of that is fact and how much of it is just what he believes. I can see him being right though.

PS: I used to see posts from Canadians calling them Provincial Marine.


Anyway, I think we're at least on our way to knowing what they are. If mine were easier to get at I'd post em up!

He did say '(if any)' & I'm sure there are some that we haven't seen that do have some. Although I have a few, I haven't looked closely yet, I see no reason why the early 19th C versions can't have backmarks (specially with the amount of variation out there)? Do you? He specialises on the early Navy buttons, I should have said that instead of military.

 

[Iron Patch]

He did say '(if any)' & I'm sure there are some that we haven't seen that do have some. Although I have a few, I haven't looked closely yet, I see no reason why the early 19th C versions can't have backmarks (specially with the amount of variation out there)? Do you? He specialises on the Navy buttons, I should have said that instead of military.

I can say in at least 50-60 not one has had a backmark. Anything is possible but I'd be very surprised to see one. Plus you definitely don't need a button to date into the 1800s to have a mark because many were marked in the 1790s. Considering the designs can vary, it would make one think they were made by different makers, but none put a backmark on them. Maybe there was some sort of guideline they had to go by, who knows.

 

[CRUSADER]

I can say in at least 50-60 not one has had a backmark. Anything is possible but I'd be very surprised to see one. Plus you definitely don't need a button to date into the 1800s to have a mark because many were marked in the 1790s. Considering the designs can vary, it would make one think they were made by different makers, but none put a backmark on them. Maybe there was some sort of guideline they had to go by, who knows.

I know about the early backmarks, I was just playing the probability game. ie. increased likelihood.

I checked my buttons out of interest & I only have 3 similar to the one posted, 2 have no backmarks, but the third is too cruddy to tell.

I found that only 2 of the ''smiling face & foulded rope type'' (my made up definition) had backmarks; '28' & 'Harrison & Smith Birmingham' (late 1800s)

 

[Iron Patch]

I know about the early backmarks, I was just playing the probability game. ie. increased likelihood.

I checked my buttons out of interest & I only have 3 similar to the one posted, 2 have no backmarks, but the third is too cruddy to tell.

I found that only 2 of the ''smiling face & foulded rope type'' (my made up definition) had backmarks; '28' & 'Harrison & Smith Birmingham' (late 1800s)

You only have one that is the type we are talking about, and that is the bottom left. That was part of my concern about your guy who answered, he would group them by general style, and instead of what seemed like a thorough answer might have actually been a vague one only suggesting possible uses, and doing so for various types that looked the same.

 

[CRUSADER]

You only have one that is the type we are talking about, and that is the bottom left. That was part of my concern about your guy who answered, he would group them by general style, and instead of what seemed like a thorough answer might have actually been a vague one only suggesting possible uses, and doing so for various types that looked the same.

I know the bottom left is the best match but there are 2 others 'very' similar. But like you say this can add to the confusion, although I see no reason why different manufacturers couldn't build in small changes (by accident or not) for the same purpose.

 

[Iron Patch]

I know the bottom left is the best match but there are 2 others 'very' similar. But like you say this can add to the confusion, although I see no reason why different manufacturers couldn't build in small changes (by accident or not) for the same purpose.

Horse shoes and hand grenades.

I think you're making a good case to discount your expert.


After seeing these buttons steady for 13 years some might look similar, but they do not to me. Kinda like George III halfpenny and a pretty obvious counterfeit. To the average person they might look close, but to someone who has followed the coins they are very different.

 

[CRUSADER]

Horse shoes and hand grenades.

I think you're making a good case to discount your expert.


After seeing these buttons steady for 13 years some might look similar, but they do not to me. Kinda like George III halfpenny and a pretty obvious counterfeit. To the average person they might look close, but to someone who has followed the coins they are very different.

he's not my expert, but as you are my expert can you id the other ones in question? (I need them in the right order & you seem to be the only one that knows?)

'As for the comparison they do vary a bit but the ID doesn't change.' Your quote to TheCannonBallGuy.

What you are trying to argue now is that only identical looking buttons have the same function & that in this case its the merchant navy. If your right why wouldn't the diverse collection of merchants have lots of different patterns, all very similar? (or vice versa) The Navy at this stage was not much different.

PS. Seriously I would like all the others IDed by you? (So I can get them in the right sections)

 

[Iron Patch]

he's not my expert, but as you are my expert can you id the other ones in question? (I need them in the right order & you seem to be the only one that knows?)

'As for the comparison they do vary a bit but the ID doesn't change.' Your quote to TheCannonBallGuy.

What you are trying to argue now is that only identical looking buttons have the same function & that in this case its the merchant navy. If your right why wouldn't the diverse collection of merchants have lots of different patterns, all very similar? (or vice versa) The Navy at this stage was not much different.

PS. Seriously I would like all the others IDed by you? (So I can get them in the right sections)

We are talking about one type of button that varies to a small degree, but they are not similar. I went with agreeing they are similar because you said it, but the truth is they are obviously different. It's actually black and white to me - not even close. As for the others, especially the ones at the top on the right, they are also very common and I wouldn't be surprised if they are merchant navy, or some kind of shipping button, but I have never seen an ID for them. I'm like many others, if it's not an issued British Royal Navy button I don't have any reference material on them, and haven't really cared or paid much attention to them. Now that it comes up I'll check my same pages with the other little one and see if he has these listed too. He does have quite a few misc. types in there, so maybe.