Written by the Treasureguide for the exclusive use o the Treasure Beaches Report.
 |
| Recently Found One-Reale Showing Partial Shield. |
Yesterday I showed both sides of this one-reale that was found while metal detecting a Treasure Coast beach. I thought it might date to 1702 -1710. I did not find the date on the coin but approximated the date from what I could see of the shield.
Before 1702, I'd expect to see the Hapsburg shield. After that I'd expect to see the Bourbon shield. Below are each of those.
 |
| Illustrations from Menzel's Cobs Pieces of Eight and Treasure Coins Book. |
If you check the picture of the coin, in the middle you'll see something like the Feur de Lys design shown on the Bourgon shield. It is not crisp and blurry on the coin, but it is matches the Fleur de Lys much better than the the device in the middle of the Happsburg shield.
On the coin you can also see the three vertical bars above and to the right side of the center shield and above and to the left you can see the partially occluded castle and the lion above that. And to the left, you can see the three horizontal bars.
The matching parts of the shield and some other contextual factors lead me to believe the reale dates in the range from 1702 to 1710.
If you can correct me on any of that, please do.
If you've been reading this blog, you probably have a good idea about how many such finds are made. I often report on such finds.
The post in the blog reported on an article from a book entitled Iron Age Coinage in South-East England: The Archaeological Context, by Colin Haselgrove, Oxford, 1987, p. 104. The article provided data on 286 "stray" British Celtic coins finds.
Here is the list with the percentages for each of several types of finds.
According to these numbers, home gardeners are every bit as likely to be involved in making such finds as prospecting archaeologists. It isn't easy to villainize a petunia-planting granny as a looter.
As I said, there are serious limitations to this data. Nonetheless, it is eye-opening. I don't know of any other similar data. Maybe there is more somewhere.
---
Here is a nice link to the evolving coat of arms of Spain.
History of the coat of arms of Spain
===
There was an interesting article in Past Times and Present Tensions, which is a blog that discusses archaeological and various other issues. The blog once had a post on the ways "stray" coin finds are made. Stray coin finds are finds that might be called "isolated finds." They are not made as a part of a systematic archaeological excavation or salvage operation. They are often made accidently.If you've been reading this blog, you probably have a good idea about how many such finds are made. I often report on such finds.
The post in the blog reported on an article from a book entitled Iron Age Coinage in South-East England: The Archaeological Context, by Colin Haselgrove, Oxford, 1987, p. 104. The article provided data on 286 "stray" British Celtic coins finds.
Here is the list with the percentages for each of several types of finds.
- Large scale earth-moving, including extractive industries and railway cuttings 4%
- Building and construction works 14%
- Cultivation and ploughing 16%
- Digging and allotments, such as drainage trenches and pits 13%
- Home gardening 10%
- Coastal or riverine erosion 20%
- Erosion or other disturbance to the grounds surface 13%
- Archaeological prospecting (field-walking) and metal detecting 10%
The numbers are several years old now, being from far back as 1987, and they are limited to Celtic coins found during a single year. Those are serious limitations that make it difficult to generalize to today, but it is interesting nonetheless, and probably still somewhat useful.
You'll notice that archaeological prospecting with metal detectors is included. Those are considered to be stray finds, unlike those found during a systematic archaeological dig. That accounted for 10% of the finds, but might be much higher in recent years as metal detector use of archaeology has increased.
Erosion accounted for 33% of the stray finds.
Construction, large scale earth moving and digging drainage etc. make up 31% of the stray finds.
Farming and gardening accounted for 26%.
Those categories point to opportunities. On the beach we pay a lot of attention to erosion, but I always check out any erosion I notice. Rivers, creeks or any kind of erosion can be worth checking.
People routinely check freshly plowed fields for arrow heads or other kinds of finds.
\
Construction projects are also good.
According to these numbers, home gardeners are every bit as likely to be involved in making such finds as prospecting archaeologists. It isn't easy to villainize a petunia-planting granny as a looter.
As I said, there are serious limitations to this data. Nonetheless, it is eye-opening. I don't know of any other similar data. Maybe there is more somewhere.
----
 |
| Surf Chart from SurfGuru.com. |
One little bump coming up.
Good hunting,
Treasureguide@comcast.net