u/ApprehensiveBunch994

Think it could be silver or some other alloy.

Looks like there’s hooks centrally that are raised

Found metal detecting in a ploughed field in Shropshire. The field has produced Roman material before, although I’m not assuming this object is Roman.

It’s a small ornate, flower-shaped metal object with several scalloped/lobed sections and projections at the top and bottom. There are bright silvery-looking areas where the soil has come away, but I don’t know whether it’s actually silver, silvered, pewter/white metal, etc.

The centre appears to contain a separate raised circular element which catches the light and looks possibly like glass, paste or a stone/setting, although I’m not certain. There also seem to be small raised features around it.

I’ve only removed loose/dry soil very carefully and I’m stopping there now. I can’t currently identify an intact hook, pin or other attachment on the reverse.

Any thoughts on what type of object it is, likely date, and what the central element might be would be really appreciated. If it looks potentially significant or precious-metal, I’ll be showing the photos to my Finds Liaison Officer.

Thanks for those that helped me ID this yesterday.

I believe this is the top third of a broken brooch with the spring still intact.

This field lies close to an old Roman road so excited to see what else I can dig out!

I know these are relatively common but it has me so over the moon

Just found this and I feel like it could be quite old.

It was a target ID in the 60s on the Deus II.

In this field I know someone found a Roman enamel brooch a few years back with lots of Roman coins found here too.

Will ask my FLO!

I’ve recently found out that my Elizabeth I silver sixpence pendant is being disclaimed after going through the Treasure process, so once the formalities are finished it should be returned to me.
I’m actually quite conflicted about what to do with it

I absolutely loved finding it and I’ve already had a huge amount of enjoyment from the whole process - identifying it, reporting it, having it examined and formally documented through PAS/Treasure.
I’ll always have the photographs, report, PAS record and the story of finding it.

The unusual part is the attached S-shaped silver suspension loop, which appears to be the particularly interesting feature and may be contemporary with the Tudor coin.

It’s a 1566 Elizabeth I sixpence that was deliberately pierced and converted into a pendant.

My dilemma is that I live in a small flat and realistically I’m not going to have it properly displayed for quite some time.

I can obviously store it carefully, but there’s a part of me that feels uncomfortable owning an archaeological object like this only for it to sit unseen in a box.

I also worry about whether I’m the best long-term custodian of something that has survived for around 460 years.

Part of what appealed to me about museum acquisition was knowing that it would be professionally preserved, recorded and potentially enjoyed by other people.

Now that it’s coming back to me, I’m wondering whether I should keep it and eventually make a proper museum-style display, or consider selling it to a collector who would appreciate and look after it properly.

If I did ever sell it, I have the full documentation from the Treasure process, including the PAS/Treasure references and Crown disclaimer, so its provenance is completely documented. I wouldn’t just stick it on eBay — I’d want to do it properly, perhaps through a specialist auction house.

Has anyone here been in a similar position after a Treasure case was disclaimed? Would something like this actually interest collectors?

And if I decide to keep it, what would you recommend as the safest way of storing it for the next few years until I have somewhere suitable to display it?

My main concern is simply making sure I don’t inadvertently damage something that has survived this long.

I’ve recently found out that my Elizabeth I silver sixpence pendant is being disclaimed after going through the Treasure process, so once the formalities are finished it should be returned to me.
I’m actually quite conflicted about what to do with it.

I absolutely loved finding it and I’ve already had a huge amount of enjoyment from the whole process - identifying it, reporting it, having it examined and formally documented through PAS/Treasure. I’ll always have the photographs, report, PAS record and the story of finding it.

The unusual part is the attached S-shaped silver suspension loop, which appears to be the particularly interesting feature and may be contemporary with the Tudor coin. It’s a 1566 Elizabeth I sixpence that was deliberately pierced and converted into a pendant.

My dilemma is that I live in a small flat and realistically I’m not going to have it properly displayed for quite some time. I can obviously store it carefully, but there’s a part of me that feels uncomfortable owning an archaeological object like this only for it to sit unseen in a box.

I also worry about whether I’m the best long-term custodian of something that has survived for around 460 years.

Part of what appealed to me about museum acquisition was knowing that it would be professionally preserved, recorded and potentially enjoyed by other people.

Now that it’s coming back to me, I’m wondering whether I should keep it and eventually make a proper museum-style display, or consider selling it to a collector who would appreciate and look after it properly.

If I did ever sell it, I have the full documentation from the Treasure process, including the PAS/Treasure references and Crown disclaimer, so its provenance is completely documented.

I wouldn’t just stick it on eBay - I’d want to do it properly, perhaps through a specialist auction house.

Has anyone here been in a similar position after a Treasure case was disclaimed? Would something like this actually interest collectors?

And if I decide to keep it, what would you recommend as the safest way of storing it for the next few years until I have somewhere suitable to display it?

My main concern is simply making sure I don’t inadvertently damage something that has survived this long.

Any thoughts would be much appreciated

I believe it has a crown on top with stars on either side. Then the lettering says ⭐️ STAND D COLOUR ⭐️

I found probably double this but these are the only items worth noting.

This was all in a field which has seen English civil war activity.

One very large old nail.

An iron bar of some description.

4 musket balls.

2 buttons, one of which has some force of decoration remaining.

A large nut and a few other pieces of miscellaneous items.

Spoke to my FLO and told this is likely a chafing dish handle. And one we’ll be recording.

Fascinates me to know who last used this and what were they cooking or heating.

If you’re in the UK - it’s very much worth getting to know you Finds Liason Officer and reporting interesting finds to them regularly. Mine in Shropshire is fantastic.

I can’t wait to one day email him and let him know I’ve found a gold hoard! 🤞

Dug up this copper alloy item which looks like it could be a swivel.

Target ID 52 and very weighty in my hand.

From researching, I think it could be old and potentially some sort of swivel which could date back to medieval times. Potentially better 12th and 15th centuries - the time of the Black Death!

Found at a depth of around 4-5 inches

The attention to detail to create something with this level of design.

Dappled light still making its way through the leaves to shine onto my book as I read, it’s just incredible

Been in my parent’s home for decades since they bought it. Very old house where priest of church used to live. I have been in other subs which seem to think the page and frame could be original and Georgian.

Writing underneath says it was engraved in 1806.

This is England, United Kingdom.

This has been hanging in our house for as long as anyone here can remember. I believe it was already hanging here when the current owners bought the house, and I’ve only recently taken a closer look at it.

The house itself is extremely old, dating back in some form to at least the 1600s, with a long history of occupation. England, Shropshire.

It is an old church house, essentially connected with the church opposite, and I believe it may historically have been used as a rectory or a house where the local priest lived.

Looking closely at the very fine writing at the bottom of the piece, I can make out what appears to say that it was written and engraved by R. D. Williamson, dated August 5th, 1806, with an address at No. 13 Tavistock Row, Covent Garden.

It appears to be an engraving of the Lord’s Prayer on paper, behind glass, with a black and gilt surround and an old gilt frame. The backing feels very old and quite fragile, so I’m reluctant to open it up or disturb anything.

I have no documented provenance for it, so I don’t want to make any assumptions about exactly how long it has been in the house. I’m just curious whether anyone recognises the engraver, knows anything about this particular piece, or can tell me more about this type of early 19th-century religious engraving.

Any information would be really appreciated!

This has been hanging in our house for as long as anyone can remember, and I believe it was already here when the house was bought.

The house is a very old former rectory called Church House, directly opposite the church, with a history of occupation going back to around the 1600s.

I don’t have any documented provenance connecting this particular piece to the rectory, but it seems to have been hanging here for a very long time.

I recently looked at it more closely and noticed the very fine writing beneath the central image. As far as I can make out, it says “Written and Engraved by R. D. Williamson”, and another line appears to read something along the lines of “Published as the Act directs, August 5th 1806, by R. D. Williamson, No. 13 Tavistock Row, Covent Garden.”

The central Lord’s Prayer appears to be printed or engraved on paper. There is a layer of glass over the front, and the black surround with gold/gilt decoration also appears to be beneath or associated with the glass.

I’m not sure exactly how it has been constructed.

The frame itself is quite substantial and has a lot of age and wear visible in the gilt surface. The backing feels almost like old, soft cardboard or board and seems quite fragile.

When I carefully handled the frame, I could feel a small amount of movement from something within it, so I’ve stopped moving it around and haven’t attempted to open it or remove the backing.

I’ve included photographs of the front, the inscription, the frame and the back. I’m mainly interested in finding out more about R. D. Williamson, whether anyone recognises this particular engraving, and whether the frame and decorative glass/surround might be contemporary with the 1806 engraving.

I’d be really interested to hear from anyone familiar with early 19th-century engravings, calligraphy or antique framing. Thanks!

I used to use the one from Von Bergow but then switched to the miners crossbow.

Piercing bolts for me as well

UPDATE: I heard back from my local Finds Liaison Officer today. They agreed that it is certainly a finger ring, based on the form of the band. Their opinion is that it’s most likely an 18th–20th century copper-alloy finger ring. Thanks everyone for the suggestions and discussion!

Ifound at a depth of around 6-8 inches in my parents garden where I’ve found a lot of very old items. I actually found a spindle whorl not far from this item pictured.

It’s 72 on target ID.

Don’t be fooled by the images, I have very large hands and I think it would comfortably fit on most adults fingers.

You may notice on the images as well there’s what seems like a deliberate groove around the outside of the ring with a reddish colouring under the patina.

I know this may well not be a ring, but I’ve found so many olives and items that clearly aren’t rings, from holding it in my hand I’m open to it (hopefully) being a ring.

I don’t see any obvious decorations that you’d expect from Victorian jewellery, could it perhaps be older?

Anyone got any ideas?

Coming up as 55-57 on XP Deus II

For the most part in my time detecting, I’ve tried to follow the rule that even if I have a solid repeatable signal of say 50-60 - but there’s some contamination of say a 0-10 also being read - then I’m best to not to dig.

I’m almost always digging signals that remain stable with a 5-10 target id range with no ferrous tone contamination.

Am I losing out here by leaving a the scratchy ‘signals’ that aren’t always a clean and stable target ID?

Quite often I have good repeatable targets but whenever I have some continuation from low target ID numbers, I tend to move on