Depth Of Older Coin Finds

[paulp_westky]

My last silver was a 1923 Merc found at an old school at a depth of only 4"-5". I'm thinking about the relationship between depth and the age of older coin finds. In your experience, what is the average depth of your older coins?

HH

Paul P.

 

[Midwest-Th'er]

Here in Illinois it seems to average 1" give or take for every decade,however I did pull out a 1919-p merc @ 4" last week.HH to all and to all a good haul,Jeremy

 

[Elton]

A lot of people say average is 6" depth.. Minelab Owners average a lot deeper.. It depends on soil conditions, weather conditions, depth of your machine for finding deep coins.. Wow so much to consider.....Are you in moved earth from an old site to new site... Barbers are sometimes 3" or less..Memorials are sometimes 8" depending on where you are hunting.. Moisture effects depth..ground thaw effects depth, Spring Heave effects depth...... Sandy soil effects depth...... stones effect depth of coins sinking... A lot of factors..Maybe the answer should be "NO set average" would be better said..

 

[Elton]

oops wrong post.

 

[jmaryt]

this is a "GENERAL"..statement based on MY experience digging here in new england
over 30 years.

1)..current clad to older clad..approx. 1 to 3 inches

2)..coins from early 60's to approx .1940's or so 3.5 to 4 inches

3)coins from 1930's to approx.late 1890's or so.4.5 to 5.5 inches

4)coins from late 1700's to approx.to early 1890's or so..6 inches and up

again!..these are "approximate" depths that represent "consistent" recoveries
over a long period of time,and because of many "variables", can ONLY be used
as a "general" guide in my hunting environment.

(h.h!)
j.t.

 

[Monte]

Other replies were also helpful because the truth is ... overall, there is no "generally" when it comes to the depth potential of coins.

jmaryt stated these are his "general" findings over 30 years of detecting in New England:

1)..current clad to older clad..approx. 1 to 3 inches

2)..coins from early 60's to approx .1940's or so 3.5 to 4 inches

3)coins from 1930's to approx.late 1890's or so.4.5 to 5.5 inches

4)coins from late 1700's to approx.to early 1890's or so..6 inches and up


As a rule, I'll boldly state that .."GENERALLY" .. coins don't sink. This is often thought to be the cause of depth on coins, but for the most part they don't really 'sink.' If you drop a coin in a glass of water it will end up on the bottom. did it 'sink?" Yes, it sort of did because 'sinking' is simply a matter of 'displacement.' In a fluid state the medium the coin was introduced to was totally fluid and there was so solid resistance until the coin hit the bottom of the glass. The fluid nature of the water simply moved around and took up the place where the coin was as it moved downward, displacing the water.

This somewhat similar to what we encounter when beach hunting, but a bit different. If a coin is dropped on dry, solid sand it will usually move just enough sand from the impact to be out of sight, in the top inch or so of sand. If lost (dropped) on very hard-packed wet sand during a low tide, it might simply rest on top of the sand as it came to rest. The medium was solid. As tides come in and out, and with greater tides there is greater disturbance of the sand, then two things happen. Not only are the sand and coins and other objects put into motion (not at rest), but it is also a very fluid state and that, alone, causes displacement which allows heavier items to find a solid point to come to rest.

In most playgrounds (tot-lots) you will find loose shredded bark or wood-chip product being used, or maybe sand, pea gravel, or some other materials used. There's one playground I used to hunt at a school near where I lived that was filled with little shells like from a cherry pit (I believe). If the medium used is very dense and hard packed, most coins and lost jewelry will be within 1-3". If it is very loose and easily disturbed as people play, the desired finds might be anywhere from surface to maybe 6"

 

[jmaryt]

outrageous info as usual!..mr .monte!..one cant help but wonder if you have given any thought to
writing a book?..i,for one would certainly be willing to "line" up for such an effort!

(h.h!)
j.t.

 

[UK Brian]

There can be no relation between coin depth and age. Its just not worth worrying about. Old coins can be on or near the surface and those a few years old at real depth.
In the picture which are coins from when I was on the East Coast two/three years back the Liberty dime and two musket balls were deepest and all five colonial near surface. The French Napoleon III silver coin was mid depth and had ended up standing on edge.

 

[Dan-Pa.]

Here in Pa. seldom get a silver coin less than 6 inches....and have dug them at 11-12...seems like other areas they are much shallower. Of course always exceptions and fill dirt is one of them
where 100 year old coins are found at an inch or so...

 

[Critterhunter]

It depends on the soil. I've dug or even saw silver right on the surface in high clay areas in undisturbed ground, yet I've dug clads at 6 or 7" in good deep black topsoil. Heck, at one of my deep old coin spots the new state quarters are already 4 to 5" deep. They ARE sinking in this type of soil due to the good/black soil along with decent moisture content. If I were to be hunting in a state that didn't receive as much rain fall those coins might not sink much at all in the same kind of soil.

In general I find my mercs and rosies are about 5 or 6" deep and go deeper from there, Barbers in general start at about that depth and go deeper as well. This in many different sites with variations in soil type, even some being a heavier clay. But as a general rule of thumb dark good soil will sink items faster, but that can be changed due to moisture content or ground traffic. Also, some coins get buried by the growth of grass and the resulting organic soil placed on top of them from decomposition.

 

[Mentez]

Hmm. weird.

I've hunted out Roman coins in plough soil up to 7 inches (previous to getting a soveriegn GT) and up to the same depths in pasture with no history of ploughing.

I'm not sure I subscribe to the theory of coins/artifacts sinking, as there seems to be definate "strata" in terms of some of my sites where there has been no soil disturbance ie - modern coins will be close to the surface, medieval 4 inches, roman 6/7 inches. This is in "normal" soil though, so perhaps there is an argument for sinking in more sandy soils?

I would guess that archaeology would be monsterously more difficult if artifacts did in fact sink through the soil. Of course, if a previously dry site became very, very waterlogged (like a stream being re-routed through it for some years) then I would be open to sinking becoming an issue.

Thinking about it, I have a site where I've found mesolithic (11,000bc - 4,000bc) and neolithic (4,000bc - 2,100bc) flint arrowheads and tools. One in particular was a large flint spearhead which would have all the pre-requesites for sinking. The thing is, all these objects were obviously found on the surface. Now stay with me here......I'm not suggesting they lay there all these years....the ploughs used in our area churn up a maximum of maybe 8-10 inches. I'm suggesting that, at least in my area, this would mean that there is no evidence for sinkage as these objects would have migrated to a long way below the pull of the plough had they in fact moved downwards over the years.

Just my twopence worth.

 

[Critterhunter]

I've found that often the coin will "free fall" rather quickly through the first 3 to 6" of soil and then can slow down in it's decent to the depths from there. This is primarily due to the soil density. Heavier soil components will tend to have migrated down deeper than the first 4 or 5" of soil in a lot of cases. What happens then is that even if a modern coin very quickly squirms it's way down in depth it will often slow down as it reaches more dense layers of the soil below. That's why even in undisturbed ground you can find modern clads and older silvers at just about the same depth. The recently dropped coins "catch up" to the ones dropped years ago. Also, another obvious factor is a lower rock or clay sub layer to the soil. It might free fall rather quick through the rich black top soil but then "hit a wall" and not be able to sink through a heavy clay or rocky bottom layer.

At one of our old coin sites nothing had been produced there for a few years and we figured it was pretty well worked out until a better machine came along. This soil also contained a lot of iron and hot rocks, so ID at depth was hard to achieve on coins. One day I was driving by and noticed construction work going on. They had stripped roughly 14" off the top of the soil. In fact, they had mostly stripped all the top soil off and left the limestone clay below it which was obvious in identification as it's a yellow color as apposed to the black soil above. We headed out to that site after construction working ours and found more old coins that had been too deep in this type of heavy iron/mineral soil to detect previously. Often these coins were laying right at the surface of this clay bottom layer that was left behind when they took the top soil. From memory when in the yellow clay areas we never dug any coins that had found their way deeper into that material. They were all either right near or on the surface of that clay or a few inches deep in portions of the black soil that had been left behind in places.

I classify my spots into depth and the majority of them have wheats in the 6 to 8" range and go deeper from there. When I start popping wheats at that depth that's when I know deeper silvers still lurk about, regardless of how hard the site has been hunted by others. If they were any kind of hunter they should have dug those wheats, as I've often found silvers can read as low as a wheat or even zincs due to their orientation in the soil, ground matrix, moisture content, or even the coin being somewhat worn.

 

[EladSwerdna]

One factor to consider is the wieght of the coin. For example I found a 1 Real at about 3" deep, while I found a 1740's KGII at 9" deep.

The heavier the coin, the quicker it sinks.

With this in mind I would also add that soil type and the possible compacting and shifting of said soil also plays an important factor.

 

[paulp_westky]

Thanks to all for the great input and discussion. That artifacts, including coins, are found in strata going from the present day to earlier time periods in direct proportion to depth is a given in archeology. It seems to me that in viewing archeological digs on television and in books, articles of many different sizes, shapes and weights are apparently found at the same level corresponding to a given time frame. How can this be squared with coins of different weights/sizes/orientations getting separated as they 'sink' ? Common sense does lead to this conclusion, so how is it that so many different artifacts end up together in one strata?

HH

Paul P.

 

[marcomo]

I'll say median depth.

My median depth for older coins is deeper than my median depth for newer coins. Absolutely no doubt about it.

I dig em all, deep or shallow, and I don't find many obsolete coins at less than 4". And obsolete coins at less than 3" are extremely rare for me.