Iron Cross 1. Classe 1870 miniature for opinion.

[Green]

A while ago I bought this miniature EK I. Because of the vaulted shape, I assume it is an EK I! I would like to hear your opinion about it?

EK I 1870 miniatur (1).jpg

EK I 1870 miniatur (2).jpg

EK I 1870 miniatur (5).jpg

EK I 1870 miniatur (6).jpg

EK I 1870 miniatur (7).jpg

EK I 1870 miniatur (3).jpg

[gregM]

Personally, I have some doubts about this piece.
The ribbon looks to be in way to good of condition when compare to
the heavily worn details on the cross. I think it is a resent put together.

[Green]

They changed the ribbon at some point, that is obvious.......but a resent put together???? Based on what....

[gregM]

They changed the ribbon at some point, that is obvious.......but a resent put together???? Based on what....

Just my gut. When did they change the ribbon, 1914 or 2014?

[Green]

Gut feelings is a negative emotion, a feeling that is not further thought by the person experiencing it.

[gregM]

Gut feelings is a negative emotion, a feeling that is not further thought by the person experiencing it.

I agree

[Green]

Thanks you were very helpful

[VtwinVince]

As a private purchase item, impossible to tell what grade this was meant to represent.

[Green]

As a private purchase item, impossible to tell what grade this was meant to represent.

Can also be added.......thanks you were very helpful

[Green]

[ATTACH]4666219[/ATTACH]

[ben bijker]

Hmm.

Some observations: although the ribbon may have been replaced later it is not unusual the cross shows the most wear.
It it the first part that has contact with anything worn .

IMO it's an ek1, but I can't prove it.

What bothers me is the tone of the comments.
Basically just negative.
That sucks a, and will lead to a dead forum.

Just my 2 cents.

[Green]

Hmm.

Some observations: although the ribbon may have been replaced later it is not unusual the cross shows the most wear.
It it the first part that has contact with anything worn .

IMO it's an ek1, but I can't prove it.

What bothers me is the tone of the comments.
Basically just negative.
That sucks a, and will lead to a dead forum.

Just my 2 cents.

Ben, thank you for this support, much appriciate this

I already started to doubt myself......at least one from of the 250, who also sees what is happening

[Miro O]

Regarding the questions about which area of a buttonback gets most wear, I would vote for a bottom (reverse) side of the ribbon together with a bottom side of the button, which are in constant contact with a dress and drag against each other all the way. The obverse side of the EK device, contrary to it, is in constant contact only with fresh air. I must admit, it also gets some temporal wear (when a wearer is hugging someone, or wearing an overcoat, or adjusting the mini, mounting it on a coat, or dismounting it). But even in that moment, the ribbon and button gets raised amount of wear as well.

When judging the wear of a ribbon on this buttonback, we should also consider that the EK device is quite heavily vaulted. But we don´t see any contact marks on the ribbon, at least some depressions at the area where outer corners of vaulted EK device should touch the ribbon. If you have this piece in hand, Green, mount it on a coat or tunic and you will see that all free space between button parts, as you see it now, is completely filled with the thickness of the dress. The ribbon, which now freely waves behind the EK, will turn forwards pressed by the fabric and gets into close contact with the EK device, at least at the vaulted corners. You can also simulate some casual outer contact or the weight of the overcoat by pushing the EK device against the ribbon. I believe that such process, mainly when it is expected to be repeated constantly, should leave some traces. But there are none... All of this, together with button slopily sewn onto the ribbon, leads me to think this buttonback was probably never worn as is, just put together from parts in different condition for collector´s purposes.

I would like to point out that the opinion "this is a good buttonback, just with replaced ribbon", is not a possible option in this case. This is what works out only with metal buttons, where you can pull out or insert ribbon to the metal ring without touching the rest of the set. In this case, replacing the ribbon means complete dismounting of all parts of the set (EK device, ribbon, thread, button) and putting them back together. This leaves open field to any "bettering" and pushes such piece more into the area of Frankensteins than between repaired original items.

Just as a side note - considering the straight mounted EK mini as EK1, is just applying TR rules into Imperial era. Which is very tempting but tricky.

[gregM]

I was not trying to be negative. I gave my honest opinion
of the piece in question. I am sorry that it was taken that way.

[Green]

Regarding the questions about which area of a buttonback gets most wear, I would vote for a bottom (reverse) side of the ribbon together with a bottom side of the button, which are in constant contact with a dress and drag against each other all the way. The obverse side of the EK device, contrary to it, is in constant contact only with fresh air. I must admit, it also gets some temporal wear (when a wearer is hugging someone, or wearing an overcoat, or adjusting the mini, mounting it on a coat, or dismounting it). But even in that moment, the ribbon and button gets raised amount of wear as well.

When judging the wear of a ribbon on this buttonback, we should also consider that the EK device is quite heavily vaulted. But we don´t see any contact marks on the ribbon, at least some depressions at the area where outer corners of vaulted EK device should touch the ribbon. If you have this piece in hand, Green, mount it on a coat or tunic and you will see that all free space between button parts, as you see it now, is completely filled with the thickness of the dress. The ribbon, which now freely waves behind the EK, will turn forwards pressed by the fabric and gets into close contact with the EK device, at least at the vaulted corners. You can also simulate some casual outer contact or the weight of the overcoat by pushing the EK device against the ribbon. I believe that such process, mainly when it is expected to be repeated constantly, should leave some traces. But there are none... All of this, together with button slopily sewn onto the ribbon, leads me to think this buttonback was probably never worn as is, just put together from parts in different condition for collector´s purposes.

I would like to point out that the opinion "this is a good buttonback, just with replaced ribbon", is not a possible option in this case. This is what works out only with metal buttons, where you can pull out or insert ribbon to the metal ring without touching the rest of the set. In this case, replacing the ribbon means complete dismounting of all parts of the set (EK device, ribbon, thread, button) and putting them back together. This leaves open field to any "bettering" and pushes such piece more into the area of Frankensteins than between repaired original items.

Just as a side note - considering the straight mounted EK mini as EK1, is just applying TR rules into Imperial era. Which is very tempting but tricky.

Thank you for your extensive analysis. I think I can conclude from this, that it is a Frankenstein.

I like to stay with my own conclusion " A good EK I 1870 buttonback, with replaced ribbon"
After replacing the ribbon, it is no longer worn! Have you consider this option.....

Just as a side note - did you ever seen a vaulted EK II?