Great new acquisition Tom! You did amazing. And great story of teamwork by forum members. It’s a beautiful buckle and looks right at home on your leather work.
How interesting the way that someone had previously raised the center bar. I’m summing that was a modification at some point? I wonder how it was worn on leather; I can’t imagine it working at all.
Tom will certainly have some thoughts, but I’m going to, very impolitely, interject here with a bit of info. Having had the buckle in hand, and looking very closely at the incredibly worn center bar, it’s soldered connections, and all of the marks present, it really looked original, but who could tell.
Recently, Tom and I discussed this cast buckle. Jed from Shiprock has this one dated to the same time frame as Tom’s buckle, ca. 1910-1915. Check out how deep the center bar is…
…oddly enough, it’s almost precisely the same depth as Tom’s, right at 1/2”. It really is a head scratcher.
Congrats! This superb, antique belt buckle was meant to be yours. It’s a beautiful balance of form and function. The leather belts you made for the buckle are wonderful, especially your impressive second belt. Kudos to all involved in this part of the buckle’s journey. This reminds me of a terrific song, “With a Little Help from My Friends” by The Beatles (1967).
Thank you for the nice comments, everyone!
Mike, considering your talent and eye for perfection in your silver work and engraving, your words hold much weight and are a huge compliment to me and Aaron. Thank you!
Thank you Zia! I do wear dress clothing for work. I’m sure Ralph Lauren would agree with you, but due to the nature of my job, this buckle would be out of place and too rugged for my comfort level compared to this little thunderbird that has been my constant work companion since it landed on my doorstep in July. 
Thanks Aaron! If the edges ever do wear flat, I’ll know who to contact to have the scalloping re-filed. 
Thank you, OO! Like I told Mike privately, after hearing his assessment and knowing I only paid $170, I felt like a lucky guest on Antiques Roadshow.
Thanks Patina! The second belt is my favorite. The layered leather presents the buckle well. The other one is good for “lighter” wear.
I’ve been away and return to see yet another fantastic buckle you’ve acquired and your careful modifications. Absolutely love it! Congrats on another unique buckle, @TAH
Thank you, Blythe! Hope all of your leather projects are coming together.
I’d like to share one of my buckles and also get some opinions from our resident Turquoise People belt buckle experts.
It’s cast, and about two inches tall, 47g. Interestingly, the teardrop shaped turquoise stones at the top and bottom appear to be set on top of a backplate that was part of the original casting. In contrast, the four oval shaped stones were soldered on between the cast arms. The turquoise appears different as well: smoother and more greasy green for the oval cabs, more turquoise in color, cut flatter, and with a rougher matrix for the teardrop stones. I’m not sure if the oval cabs were a later addition or part of the original design. The vertical bar is soldered on, not part of the casting, and possibly a later addition? The twisted wire tang is clearly not original.
I’d love to hear everyone’s thoughts, and especially guesses as to age, as I find cast items in particular very hard to date.
Beautiful buckle, OO. 
Thank you for sharing. I’m no expert, and obviously @TAH and @mmrogers will no doubt have some valuable insight, but I’ll be more than happy to provide my thoughts.
I agree with this, the areas of the casting at 12 and 6 o’clock look to be original.
I feel like this would be impossible to determine; as you well know, it could easily be either. The patina at the solder joints, as well as on the back of the settings, looks appropriate in contrast to the rest of the buckle. As you point out, the oval stones are obviously different, in both appearance and finish, than the teardrop stones, but the bezels look very similar on all 6. I find that interesting, but not indicative. The oval stones do sit well within the radii of the casting.
On the back of your buckle, it doesn’t appear there is evidence of an attachment bar/swivel bar, or a post, at least I don’t see any. As you know, soldered center bars are pretty common on cast buckles. Here are a few noteworthy examples…
This one, while rather crudely placed, appears to be flat with the back of the buckle, and could have been cast with the rest of the buckle, had the smith desired.
The center bars on both of these buckles of mine are soldered, and I feel both are original; neither buckle shows evidence of a pre-existing, cast-in center bar and both are raised from the back of buckle. Obviously the silversmith desired the depth this would provide. To cast a raised center bar (like these) integral to the rest of the buckle would be much more involved a process and an unnecessarily complicated one, than simply leaving the opening empty and soldering the bar on.
Although a bit small, this example, with its repurposed stones, remains as one of my favorite buckles. It is evident (especially at the bottom) that the bar was hammered flat at the ends for greater surface contact, then soldered to the back of the buckle.
I think the reasons a bar was cast integral to a buckle, or not, are anybody’s guess.
Integral bars are nice to see, and give a cast center bar buckle a more well thought out look, in my opinion.
Again, this one of mine is a bit small, but the center bar and the prong-centering ribs that were incorporated into it really showcase attention to detail, I feel.
I find it interesting that the bar on your buckle is placed nearer the face of the buckle, as opposed to being on or closer to the back. This would definitely provide a great amount of leather stacked up outside the front of the buckle when it’s worn, which gets a huge from me.
It looks like your buckle has some incredible wear. The peaks of the casting look smooth and almost polished, as opposed to the rougher surfaces of the valleys and crevices.
The pattern of your buckle does seem unique. I see elements from a few other patterns, but combined differently in yours. Some of these are present in the previously shared examples, and I see some similarities in design to this one, as well. Note how this looks like it was designed as a center bar buckle, but it’s got a swivel bar attachment point.
I think this is exceedingly difficult. @mmrogers, looking at the back of OO’s buckle, does it look to you like the surface texture of the silver seems to be radiating from the central oval? I fell asleep last night composing this lengthy response, so perhaps I’m just seeing things. Before guessing on age, I’d like to hear Mike’s thoughts concerning this.
I’m very much looking forward to the opinions of others. Thanks again for sharing, @OrbitOrange, it’s a lovely buckle that I’m sure you wear well!
Thank you for your very thoughtful and detailed response @Ravenscry. I really appreciate the time and thought you put into that, and the many excellent examples you shared. I’m also feeling a little bad picturing you composing that post to the point of exhaustion last night 
.
It’s interesting to hear your thoughts on center bars in particular. This is something unique to belt buckles, and you’ve clearly put a lot of thought into it whereas up until now I had put very little. The integrated cast center bars do make for a very sophisticated and polished look in the examples you shared, though I imagine this is less noticeable and important when the buckles are worn. I can certainly see how this would be much more difficult to execute when casting. I’m not sure I ever would have noticed how my bar being soldered at the front of the buckle is in contrast to the vast majority of cast buckles with soldered bars, which have the bar soldered at the back.
This is one thing (along with the great greasy green stones) that attracted me to this buckle. I love cast jewelry, and especially ketoh inspired buckles with graceful curving arms. But so often when cast buckles and bracelets have turquoise, it seems likes the stones were just kind of plopped on top as an afterthought, and not infrequently I think they actually detract from the graceful design. In this buckle the stones are well integrated and feel like they were meant to be there. That said, I’m still not completely sure if they were part of the silversmith’s original design.
Every buckle you shared was amazing, but this one in particular really caught my eye. Do you mind sharing where it’s from?
Unfortunately I haven’t yet. I find pairing buckles to belts to be just difficult enough that I usually drag my feet for a while, but the belt I ordered for it just came so hopefully I’ll be wearing it soon!
That’s a gorgeous turquoise belt buckle! Wonderful design and so well balanced. Looks to me like the turquoise isn’t all the same. In the 1st photo, lower left corner, that cab looks to me like it could possibly be Green Royston turquoise. You mentioned that you don’t consider the tang to be original to the buckle. To my eye, its spiral pattern adds an additional uniqueness to this buckle.
Just want to say that this convo between you and @OrbitOrange is absolutely a delight of detail and insights. Thank you both; I so enjoy learning from explorations of this kind.
I’m happy to share my thoughts, @OrbitOrange, and I’m grateful to know that they didn’t put you to sleep.
This is something @TAH and myself look closely at, as it determines whether or not the leather protrudes from the face of the buckle or not. Personally, and I know Tom feels the same, I prefer a good amount of leather “stack up” outside the face of the buckle, as opposed to the leather being flush or behind the buckle. I feel I can speak for Tom, because together we just ran the gamut on this exact issue on his new buckle that we modified the center bar on. As he pointed out in his wonderful post containing it, the original center bar was close to 1/2” deep, and wouldn’t have provided any of this protrusion of leather from the buckle. It’s all personal preferences!
This is true, and it’s really not that big of a thing, I just enjoy seeing it on a buckle. I feel it tells a story of a silversmith that put a little extra effort into his work.
I mentioned it before, but I’d like to ay it again. This will provide a awesome amount of protruding leather when you’re wearing it, making for a killer look!
Such a true statement and you’re not solitary in your feelings. I feel that features in silver can hold their own, they don’t need seemingly randomly placed settings soldered directly on top of them. Like these…
Many people may not be bothered by this, but it’s a hard no for me, again, just my personal preference!
I agree, if they were a later addition, the smith did a wonderful job of incorporating them, paying attention to size, shape, and placement.
That one had sold a number of years ago from a picker in the Southwest, that I believe relies on Instagram as their selling platform. I love that one, as well, and it closely resembles this ca. 1890-1900 buckle from Teal McKibben’s collection that has been shared and briefly discussed here in the past…
I know all about that , especially if you’re wanting vintage leather. Unless of course your name is Brit West. @Ziacat. @TAH is much more expedient than myself in getting his buckles on beautiful leather.
Beautiful sand cast buckle @OrbitOrange. It looks to me like the settings were all added at the same time. The twisted square wire tongue is definitely a replacement, and the cross bar looks like it may have been a replacement as well, although with less certainty. Removing the stones to do the work for the crossbar would be relatively simple. I’m inclined to think 30’s - 50’s for the likely origin date, although its apparent from the finishing work on the back it’s been worked on since then.
I appreciate your input Mike. That time frame feels about right to me and is what I was hoping for, though with cast work I’m always extra hesitant to commit to a date, as techniques have changed so little over time. I’m also inclined to think the stones are all original, as they clearly show some age and also fit in so well with the design, but I wasn’t sure if I was just being optimistic.
Not much to add other than to reiterate this is a beautiful buckle, @OrbitOrange and I, too, am enjoying the conversation. Excellent post and accompanying photos, Aaron (@Ravenscry)! The thing I find most intriguing and somewhat unusual is the combination of oval/domed and teardrop/flat stones, but I see nothing to think the oval cabs were added later. Regardless, it’s a great looking piece. If it isn’t too much trouble, I’d love to see the belt you selected.
Thanks Aaron! My expediency must come from my trouser retention disorder.
On a side note, it’s always a bonus when a buckle prong can double as a spear for lion hunting. 
Wow! This is an absolutely impressive collection Aaron. Fantastic buckles, one and all!
Love the way this one’s been textured with a section of file, Tom. Really cool inventive use of tooling!
I agree, Tom.
I know all too well that it stems from your desire to place these magnificent works of silver where they belong! That you’re an exceptional leather worker aids in quickly getting them on the waist, as well.
That buckle’s prong definitely needs a revamp. Looks like about 1/2” could be trimmed…again!!
Thank you, Mike, but just to be clear, if you’re referring to the post I responded to @OrbitOrange with, only three of those are mine. I apologize for the dark first photo. The turquoise in the buckle on the right is much more vibrant than that photo portrays.
Same here, Mike. The buckle with the “lion hunting spear” is not mine. It was an example Aaron used in his post. But I agree, the file texturing really sets off the buckle.
