Testoon fragment ?

Finds and artefacts found while out metal detecting which require identifying.
Forum rules
IMPORTANT - MANDATORY REQUIREMENTS

Prior to submitting your request for an ID, please note the mandatory requirements shown here H.A.M.M.Y Code
Duplicate or Images deemed unnecessary may be removed to save server space and maintain this free service for members.

IMAGE ALLOWANCE – Strictly a maximum of 8 images per day per member.
Please also remember to include Please and Thank You for ID’s provided.
Post Reply
Pedrosky
Posts: 915
Joined: Tue Feb 02, 2021 8:22 pm
Has thanked: 1175 times
Been thanked: 865 times

Testoon fragment ?

Post by Pedrosky »

I found this hammered fragment the other day and it was so mullered I just assumed it was a button. After some extreme scalpel and zap treatment I’ve managed to bring it back, hopefully enough for an ID. I think it’s Henry VIII and possibly a testoon ( I’ve only just found out that was a shilling). Thanks for any help [81/]
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Top
Pedrosky
Posts: 915
Joined: Tue Feb 02, 2021 8:22 pm
Has thanked: 1175 times
Been thanked: 865 times

Post by Pedrosky »

Or groat possibly? Just clocked the testoon doesn’t have the shield on the reverse.
Top
User avatar
Allectus
Posts: 41063
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2011 8:37 am
Location: Essexshire ;-)
Has thanked: 1424 times
Been thanked: 19979 times

Post by Allectus »

Henry VIII, 3rd or posthumous groat frag.
Only in it for the ££££'s =P~
Top
Pedrosky
Posts: 915
Joined: Tue Feb 02, 2021 8:22 pm
Has thanked: 1175 times
Been thanked: 865 times

Post by Pedrosky »

Allectus wrote: Thu Jan 09, 2025 8:45 pm Henry VIII, 3rd or posthumous groat frag.
Thanks again! [81/]
Top
User avatar
fred
Posts: 18768
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2014 6:15 pm
Location: Kent
Has thanked: 6753 times
Been thanked: 14820 times

Post by fred »

Pedrosky wrote: Thu Jan 09, 2025 8:49 pm Thanks again! [81/]
These were badly debased hence the condition. [81/]
Top
Pedrosky
Posts: 915
Joined: Tue Feb 02, 2021 8:22 pm
Has thanked: 1175 times
Been thanked: 865 times

Post by Pedrosky »

fred wrote: Thu Jan 09, 2025 9:54 pm These were badly debased hence the condition. [81/]
You’re not wrong. Old Coppernose was really taking the mick with this one. I thought it must have been in a fire or welded to iron or something. Definitely one of the poorest condition coins I’ve had to clean.
Top
Post Reply

Return to “Identification of Detecting Finds”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: bodvoc, Chalky14, Etruscan_Toad, Giz, hartsman, Jay jay, Lower pic, Macsen Wledig, Moritasgus, Moxey, Pedrosky, Schmo, stevo-preston, stontronix, stupot, W1ll and 29 guests