Hey Crusader, I can get Hammered, too! Great Weekend in the Field of Dreams

oxbowbarefoot

Banned
May 25, 2011
2,268
1,850
🥇 Banner finds
4
Primary Interest:
Other
Note: Edited with corrected info, thanks Silver Searcher!

Spent the weekend detecting in the Field of Dreams with fellow TNet-ers Greylock, Casper, Worldtalker, and BrokenKnee.

Saturday's hunt was phenomenal with 4 silvers and a sweet Indian Celt. Checked another American Silver off my list with the 1853 Seated Half dime (too bad I nicked it), got a 1890 Seated Dime, a 1853 3-Cent Silver, and a Colonial Silver ring (no markings). Best find of the day for me was the Indian Celt. Its in really nice shape for being found in a plow zone. Found the baby turtle in the middle of the field, looked like the plow disturbed the nest. Unfortunately, it was too late to save him.

Today I managed a few more goodies. My very first signal of the day was a sweet 1753 (I think) King George Copper. After about another 3 feet I got a faint blip that sounded and read like can slaw. I've dug a lot a great targets at this location that sound like trash, so I decided to dig it. I flipped the dirt pile over, scanned it with my AT-Pro and got a solid 52 in the pile. My first handful held the signal. I saw the shimmer of silver as I looked though the dirt. A second look and I saw a cross staring at me. I though I had found my first Spanish Cob, but it was too thin for that. Upon a closer inspection, I could tell that the coin wasn't Spanish, I was looking at a Charles 1st Hammered Silver Penny! Got a few nice buttons, a couple Crotal Bells and some other cool stuff that I'll post later on.

I can't believe I just found an early 1600's English Hammered Silver coin in Western Massachusetts! This coin was found in the same field that I found my Oak Tree Shilling and 4 or 5 William III Coppers. The area was settled in the 1650's.

Can anyone give me anymore specific information on this coin? I will try to get some better pics once I get the dirt off.
 

Attachments

  • 1.JPG
    1.JPG
    83.9 KB · Views: 260
  • 2.JPG
    2.JPG
    45.3 KB · Views: 226
  • 3.JPG
    3.JPG
    47 KB · Views: 224
  • 4.JPG
    4.JPG
    87.9 KB · Views: 218
  • 5.JPG
    5.JPG
    52.2 KB · Views: 243
  • 8.JPG
    8.JPG
    76.4 KB · Views: 224
  • 7.JPG
    7.JPG
    83.2 KB · Views: 226
  • 6.JPG
    6.JPG
    111.8 KB · Views: 241
Last edited:
Upvote 16
Need a closer picture of the back, but it's not a half groat, it's a penny, and I'm sure it's a Charles1st...cool find :icon_thumleft:

SS
 

Last edited:
Much tougher to dig than a cob, so be happy to cross that off.... because the cob is still going to turn up.
 

That is one generous field!

You are finding everything there, no doubt the cob will turn up for you there!


If I hadn't revised my post cutting a bit off, we would have likely said that within a few seconds. :)
 

Need a closer picture of the back, but it's not a half groat, it's a penny, and I'm sure it's a Charles1st...cool find :icon_thumleft:

SS


Thanks for the clarification. I will try to get some better detail and post the pics later on.
 

Yeap Charles I Penny. Very nice find - 1600s (early)
 

Charles? I could have sworn I saw Elizabeth, but Charles is good enough for me!

IP, I will give the copper a proper peroxide bath tonight, but it looks like the detail will show up nicely. I think it said 1753.
 

Incredible Finds ! Could you put up more pics of the ring ? that would be a rare find if "period "
 

The O I see doesn't seem to be the same type of number punch, so I might just be seeing things on that... but it still seems to be missing the 2nd last letter. (V or U)
The I looks short, or is that my eyes...and are the letters bigger ?

SS
 

Charles? I could have sworn I saw Elizabeth, but Charles is good enough for me!

IP, I will give the copper a proper peroxide bath tonight, but it looks like the detail will show up nicely. I think it said 1753.


Then it seems like it's missing the V. Interested to see how it turns out. It seems like a genuine looking coin so would be odd to be missing a letter like that. Would be a pretty bad mistake and the type of one you would think you'd see more on a crude counterfeit. That's sort of why I was thinking double struck.
 

Super find, and congrats on joining the US hammered club. If you can take some good close-ups of both sides you might be able to pick out the mint mark that should enable you to get a much better estimate on the date than the 1625-49 for Charles I coins.
 

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top