UPDATE: Rather than delete what I wrote below just know that this new information supersedes some of the information below. It has come to my attention that the Foul Anchor is no earlier than 1922 based on the design. Prior to 1922, the anchor would have a twisted rope fouling it, and after 1922 it would have a chain. I’m still leaning toward it being as early as possible based on my other supplied information but what this means is either than the gentleman in question had an extra long career (I don’t pretend to be knowledgeable in this matter but even to me that seems doubtful) or perhaps the Fouler Anchor belonged to a son? Or maybe was simply acquired by him for some reason. I still in my gut trust the relative that had this framed when they say who these items belonged to, but it seems likely they had some confusion and maybe this belonged to the gentleman’s son. It is also within the realm of possibility that this anchor was later than the 1920s but I’m standing my ground for now based on both the patina and the supplied partial provenance. Any further information I find out will be added in future updates and price will be adjusted accordingly. The buckle is the real star here but the anchor is still a nice bonus. Again, rather than the anchor being the 100-120 years old I had originally thought, it may only be 80-100 years old. I have partial provenance for these, written on back of frame by a younger relation to the original owner (I believe a grandson or great grandson, I got this from the estate of his granddaughter who passed in 2023). I have done research on the name and found that he was born in 1874. I was not able to find his exact service dates but I have other clues that should narrow the possible range (with the likely range being even smaller unless he had an above average length Naval Career). For the buckle (which is buckle only, missing the clasp at the other end of the belt that the buckle would latch into). If he went to the Naval Academy as a 14 year old, and the buckle was issued from the start, the buckle could date from 1888. If he went to the academy as a 22 year old and the buckle was not issued until graduation then the buckle could be from 1900. A good average would suggest early/mid 1890s in which case he very likely could have served during the Spanish-American war (I make no claims as to the specifics of his service during any conflicts, only educated/researched guesses as to what periods he served during). I believe this buckle predates the more commonly seen one with an Eagle but I don’t have a very big knowledge base on those buckles. For the pin: (I believe it is a hat pin, could have been use elsewhere on the uniform I suppose). According to my very limited research, the US Navy did not have the rank of Chief Petty Officer until 1893. So that is the earliest possible date for his promotion to that rank. The earliest possible date for the pin itself is 1905, as that is when the Fouled Anchor was first adopted for this rank. I do not know for certain if there were prior variations. It could be as late as World War One era as well, depending on the length of his career. The design is definitely slightly varied from most of the ones I have seen called WW2/Korea/Vietnam. The buckle is gold-toned but it could either be brass or gold plated over something else. Small chance of high grade metallic paint as well. If gold plated it is interesting that the gold tone hasn’t worn off. If brass it is interesting that it hasn’t tarnished much (does not appear to be polished, at least not recently). There are some slightly darker areas that could either be wear or tarnish, or possible even staining. But overall attractive with a shiny metallic fine satin to almost semi-gloss finish. From what I can tell about the pin, it is gold-plated Sterling silver, but without removing from the frame (which has paper glued to the back) I can not inspect it further. I just know that these were commonly made of Sterling for other conflicts. The gold tone has largely rubbed off the smooth portions but seems to have stuck well to the more ornate portions like the anchor’s chain and the decorative beading around the anchor’s edge. If this does not sell or garner interest in fairly short order I would consider removing from the frame for buyers I think are serious, so that I can look them over better and report my findings, if any. The frame may add value to some but it may not matter to others. I only want to remove it if I’m convinced it is necessary. I know they are at least 100 years old each (I think on average they are closer to 120 years old) and authentic, and most of their value is associated with their history, not so much their materials. If one or both happens to be Sterling or just gold/silver plate over brass or bronze or copper, I would not be surprised either way. Realistically given the provenance and relative rarity that shouldn’t affect the price much either way.