Strange Brass Oval Hoop

[cambria09]

Hello All. I found this at 1900's site near an old sawmill. It is brass and looks like it was used to bind something together...any ideas out there are appreciated. Thanks for tuning in.

C9

 

[Indian Steve]

Looks like a flattened bracelet to me. steve

 

[vpnavy]

I have to agree with steve.

 

[cudamark]

Most bracelets I've seen have the pattern run all the way around. It's kind of an ugly pattern (for jewelry) to boot. It looks more like a handle to a tankard, stein, drinking cup, pot, etc to me. Does the other side have any indication of solder or attachment points?

 

[Breezie]

Cambria, First of all, thank you for posting a great close-up photo of your bracelet, which allowed me to see that you have a GREAT find. I am not 100% sure, but I think your bracelet has a 'slave trade' influence. I am 100% sure it is handmade and extremely old. If not, it's a hellava repro.

The majority of slave trade bracelets are bangles with splayed ends. (For an example, look at my banner find.) I don't think yours is an actual slave trade bracelet, but I think it was made with that influence by one of the Tri-Racial tribes/groups whose past generations did make them. Did you find this in Florida? There is a history of Tri-Racials in Florida, which you might want to do some research.

If you will examine your bracelet, you'll see none of the diagonal rings are symmetrical; actually, all are different in size. The larger holes are not symmetrical either. The surface looks to have natural patina from many years of use. It looks to be either brass or bronze.

When I found my slave trade bracelet, I thought it was an old hippy type bracelet, so I threw it in my bag, and didn't realize the age until I got home and cleaned it. I knew it was extremely old; therefore, I had it appraised/professionally identified. If I were you, I'd find a historian who specializes in Tri-Racial groups in Florida and let him/her give you their opinion.

Super neat find
Breezie

 

[cambria09]

Cambria, First of all, thank you for posting a great close-up photo of your bracelet, which allowed me to see that you have a GREAT find. I am not 100% sure, but I think your bracelet has a 'slave trade' influence. I am 100% sure it is handmade and extremely old. If not, it's a hellava repro.

The majority of slave trade bracelets are bangles with splayed ends. (For an example, look at my banner find.) I don't think yours is an actual slave trade bracelet, but I think it was made with that influence by one of the Tri-Racial tribes/groups whose past generations did make them. Did you find this in Florida? There is a history of Tri-Racials in Florida, which you might want to do some research.

If you will examine your bracelet, you'll see none of the diagonal rings are symmetrical; actually, all are different in size. The larger holes are not symmetrical either. The surface looks to have natural patina from many years of use. It looks to be either brass or bronze.

When I found my slave trade bracelet, I thought it was an old hippy type bracelet, so I threw it in my bag, and didn't realize the age until I got home and cleaned it. I knew it was extremely old; therefore, I had it appraised/professionally identified. If I were you, I'd find a historian who specializes in Tri-Racial groups in Florida and let him/her give you their opinion.

Super neat find
Breezie

WOW!! Thank your Breezie for ID'ing this item found in FL. As you said about your slave tread bracelet find, I thought I just had another piece of unidentifiable brass common to the 1900's.

After reading your response I did a bit of research on the area where I dug the item and discovered that before the saw mill era of the 1920's there was a thriving turpentine industry there beginning in the 1880's. Turpentine camps were notorius for conscriping convicts and black laborers leaving the plantation system after the CW. Conditions were so harsh that in 1910 the state legislature passed laws to prohibit the leasing of convict labor. There was a black cemetery somewhere in the area and it appears that much of the labor was provided by former slaves and their decendants. So your identification seems to be spot on.

Thanks again for the reply and I will update this thread if I can get specific info on my find. HH and my the finds be with you!

C9

 

[Breezie]

WOW!! Thank your Breezie for ID'ing this item found in FL. As you said about your slave tread bracelet find, I thought I just had another piece of unidentifiable brass common to the 1900's.

After reading your response I did a bit of research on the area where I dug the item and discovered that before the saw mill era of the 1920's there was a thriving turpentine industry there beginning in the 1880's. Turpentine camps were notorius for conscriping convicts and black laborers leaving the plantation system after the CW. Conditions were so harsh that in 1910 the state legislature passed laws to prohibit the leasing of convict labor. There was a black cemetery somewhere in the area and it appears that much of the labor was provided by former slaves and their decendants. So your identification seems to be spot on.

Thanks again for the reply and I will update this thread if I can get specific info on my find. HH and my the finds be with you!

C9

You're most welcome! The history on the location is really interesting and sounds like it is pertinent to the making of your bracelet. I look forward to your updates. Congrats again on a really neat find! Breezie

 

[gunsil]

Breezie I normally like your IDs, but I beg to differ several points on this one. First, although it is hard to tell from the photo, is that it appears to be rather small for a bangle bracelet. A photo of it lying flat with the penny inside it would help, but it looks too small to go over even a small person's hand. It is definitely NOT handmade. I am a fairly accomplished maker of silver and gold jewelry, and the design on it cannot be applied by hand, it was either cast there or rolled on with a machine. The object definitely has a patina of aged brass but it could easily look like that and be only 75 years old.
Cambria, please post another photo of the item lying flat with the penny inside so we can get a better idea of the diameter.

 

[Breezie]

Gunsil, thanks for your post. The only way we'll know the exact size of the bracelet is for C9 to use a soft/bendable tape (since the bracelet is bent), and measure the circumference or either measure it with a string, then measure the string. Attached are 2 pics of a bracelet of mine. As you can see it measures 7 inches long, and there is at least 1 inch of slack, so I could possibly wear a 6 inch bracelet, and I'm close to 5' 8" tall. Using your number (as an example) of it being only 75 yrs. old, back then, people were smaller than they are now. I, like you, am interested in knowing the size.

As far as it not being handmade, how do you explain the inconsistencies of the rings, holes, and diamonds. It seems to me if it were machine made, they would be at least close to symmetrical. You said the design had to be cast or rolled with a machine. Attached is a pic of a bronze Slave Trade bracelet from 1750 with a spiral design that looks more elaborate than the rings on C9s. If this spiral ring could be made, why not a simple circle? Here's the website:
RARE TYPE African Bronze Slave Trade Bracelet, c.1750! from aestheticengineering on Ruby Lane

Hopefully you know I'm not arguing with you, but trying to establish proper knowledge on this bracelet.

Breezie

 

[Silver Searcher]

It looks like a bracelet, but for a child and unless the soil has been very kind to it, it doesn't look like it's been in the ground that long.

SS

 

[gunsil]

Hi Breezie, your use of a chain bracelet is like comparing apples to oranges. I have probably made 2,000 or more bangle bracelets, and since they have to fit OVER your knuckles they cannot be compared in length to a bracelet that doesn't have to slip over the hand or is flexible. A circumference of 6" only gives a diameter of 1.91" and an 8" circumference only gives a diameter of 2.54". When I make a run of bangles my average piece of silver wire will be 8-8&1/2 " for an average size bangle for an average size woman. I suspect that one for you would run closer to 9" based on your height. Don't forget that it has to go over your finger and thumb knuckles at the same time and not do so painfully. People in America were not really smaller 75-100 years ago, my grandparents and most folks were about the same size as we are today. The object in question is bent and if made round it looks like there might not be a four penny span across it, very small for a bracelet, and even for a child's bracelet.
About "hand made" jewelry. The "slave bracelet" (and that's a pretty loose term) you put a link for is a cast piece, it was not hand made. People have been casting metal for thousands of years and it is one of a few ways of getting raised designs without soldering the raised part of a design onto the main piece. If the little circle design on the object in question was added on as it would have to be if it were hand made it would have to show signs of solder which it doesn't. It is also made from a non-precious metal, and few craftsmen would spend as much time as it would take to hand make such an item in a cheaper metal. It would also have to have a seam in the piece which would have to have been soldered and I see no evidence of a seam. Now I am 65 years old, but I still don't need glasses to read the newspaper every day, and I don't see any real difference in the holes, diamond shapes, or the circle designs. Remember also that if the piece were cast that someone had to make the mold and there will be variances in any mold work. If the piece is rolled out which I believe it is the roller has to be made with the pattern and the roller engraving will also show minor differences in uniformity. I know you are not arguing with me, nor I with you, but there are misconceptions about the manufacture of metal objects that I am trying to clear up here.
We need cambria to show us photos of the piece lying flat on a ruler to properly determine it's size and inside diameter which in turn will provide another clue as to whether it was a bracelet or some other as yet unknown object.

 

[mical66]

first i want to say Breezie is amazing at IDng things as well as alot of the ppl here .
But i agree with Gunsil . i may be 100% wrong but looking at the item in his hand ( and i know all hands are different sizes ) it looks to be around 3 inches wide and inch and a half tall, maybe big enough for a child or real small woman , but it seems hard to believe them sliding that small thing over there knuckles.

problem is , i cant think of much else it could be , and braclet was my first thought when i seen it , then i looked at the size . almost thought it was a belt loop for the little tab left over past your buckle to slide into but think it would be to big for that...

Breezie i would love to see any pictures you have or can find of old slave braclets, i can see where this one was wielded on the bottom.

 

[Breezie]

Gunsil, after reading your latest post, I think we are saying the same thing about 'handmade' vs. 'machine made.'

I think you thought I meant 'handmade' as not using any type of mold, cast, or roll. Machine made to me means parts are die cut from an electric machine yielding hundreds or even thousands of pieces a day. My point was/is: C9's bracelet is not a cookie-cutter bracelet that was machine made producing a thousand just like it in one day. My young granddaughter has lots of metal dress-up bracelets, and I'm sure they were machine cut, probably in China and were produced by the thousands. C9's bracelet looks to have inconsistencies as if it were 'handmade,' which could incorporate casting or any other tool necessary to complete the task. If the mold was old/worn, that would cause non-symmetrical areas.

Women were smaller 100+ years ago than they are today. Nutrition and health has improved greatly, and obesity was not as big of an issue then as it is now. The average waist size for a Victorian woman was 18 inches after corsetting. In 2004, the average woman's waist size was 34 inches.

It could be a child's bracelet as SS and Mical suggested. Mical, look at my banner find for an example of a slave bracelet. Also, if you type in slave bracelet in Google, then click images, you'll see lots.

Let me repeat, I never thought C9's 'item' was a slave trade bracelet. I said I think it was made with that influence by one of the Tri-Racial tribes/groups whose past generations did make them.


Breezie

 

[cambria09]

Hello Everyone. First I want to say thanks for all the interest in this piece.

There are no solder joins on the item and the design does not appear to have been added onto the surface. In fact, since the small circles are "outies", I am thinking that the designs are an "as-casted" feature. The circles inside of the diamond shapes are indentations and are not holed all the way through, so maybe they were for gem or bead settings.

OK now for the dimensions, the piece's circumference is just over 8.5-IN, making the circular diameter about 2.7-IN. I am 6'-2" tall and I would not be able to get it past my thumb if it was circular in shape. My wife, however at 5'-2" tall can wear hoop bracelets that are 2.5-IN in diameter. So it would be large enough for a woman's or child's hand to easily fit through.

Thanks again. C9

 

[mical66]

thanks for the link Breezie, as i aid in my first post my first thought was a braclet , but the size threw me. like the poster i am a big guy at 6'4" and 225 pounds , and was / is hard for me to picture some one fitting that over their hands, but i accept it can be done and people were a smaller build back then.