Iron Cross 1. Classe 1870 miniature for opinion.

[Miro O]

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....

Yes, I did, I speak about it in third paragraph of my previous comment. But I can repeat it. Replacing a ribbon on such buttonback (low cost type without soldered ribbon ring) means:

Opening the prongs on the EK device and releasing them from the old ribbon, then cutting the thread at some point and completely dismounting it from the old ribbon and from the button as well. In this moment you have four separate parts laying on your "working table" (four at best, you only hardly dismount the thread in one piece). Do you call it "just replacing the ribbon"? I call it autopsy. And this is the most optimistic version of what could happen during "replacing the ribbon".

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

Oh man, this is a miniature world not full size one. Here I have seen vaulted even Pour le Mérites...

[Green]

Yes, I did, I speak about it in third paragraph of my previous comment. But I can repeat it. Replacing a ribbon on such buttonback (low cost type without soldered ribbon ring) means:

Opening the prongs on the EK device and releasing them from the old ribbon, then cutting the thread at some point and completely dismounting it from the old ribbon and from the button as well. In this moment you have four separate parts laying on your "working table" (four at best, you only hardly dismount the thread in one piece). Do you call it "just replacing the ribbon"? I call it autopsy. And this is the most optimistic version of what could happen during "replacing the ribbon".




Oh man, this is a miniature world not full size one. Here I have seen vaulted even Pour le Mérites...

At first a long monolog about the contact marks on the ribbon and now an explanation of an autopsy for replacing the ribbon!


Oh, man...show me some vaulted miniatur EK II ´s....not one but several? I cannot, because of the bad Dutch Internet Providers (with poor search functions), as you mensioned several times before on several threads from me!

You didn't convince me and I don't think you can....all I've heard are assumptions!

At least the piece is marked forever and only good for the garbage bin. This is often the verdict for the not texbook items......thanks anyway!

[Miro O]

Oh, man...show me some vaulted miniatur EK II ´s....not one but several?

http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...9&postcount=24

This is the best example (on the right side) going against all rules known from full size awards - vaulted, one-sided EK2 mini, mounted on top of the bigger EK1. In the thoroughly unofficial imperial miniature world, everything is possible and limited just by customer´s taste and money. So the best thing you can do to express your ownership of EK1, is to put not one, but two EK pieces on a button. Equal or different size, vaulted or one-sided, it doesn´t matter.

You didn't convince me and I don't think you can...

Sad but true. Wondering why I still try.

[Don D.]

Some days we cannot seem to come to a consensus. That happens. In the end, the collector must feel comfortable with the item in hand. Perhaps a look into maker's catalogs would find a match or at least a vaulted example of sorts.

[Miro O]

Some days we cannot seem to come to a consensus. That happens. In the end, the collector must feel comfortable with the item in hand. Perhaps a look into maker's catalogs would find a match or at least a vaulted example of sorts.

I handled three EK 1870 minis of this type - mounted straight on the button, hollow struck, two of them were also vaulted. The only but important difference is that they were soldered onto the ring of metal button. All of them I sold as EK2s. Btw, one of them was with noncombatant ribbon. It would be really daring to offer it as noncombatant EK1 1870, and I would be surely teared to small parts overe here for it.

Following page from AWS catalog shows the variety of EK2s offered by this company. The only other cross which is not EK2 there, is Grandcross in the top center, which is clearly marked as Komthurkreuz. This is the reason, why the caption under further products speak only about "Kreuz" and his particular size (Original Grösse, Prinzen-Grösse, AWS-Grösse, Sechsgrösse, Groschgrösse, etc). You can choose whatever you want here - EK2 mounted separately or with other awards, EK2 as brooch, as rossette, interimspange, as dangling mini, or as straight mounted mini (the piece No 310 looks also vaulted). It is up to you, this what this catalog clearly says.

https://ak-group.ru/forum/attachment...3&d=1398639092

Of course, this page can be also explained in the way that you can choose what this mini represents. If EK2 or EK1. It is naturally possible, and it surely few times really happened. But the question is - where are those EK1s we know AWS produced? If they put Grandcross to the catalog and all variants of full size EK2 mounts, there must be some EK1s as well... I believe that there is also some other catalog page, where are those missing EK1s in Originalgrösse, Furstengrösse or Prinzengrösse, and that there are also some miniature variants of all sizes spread between them. The question is - what they look like? Do you think there are just the same minis as here repeated? Or are there EK1/EK2 combos in all sizes, types of mounts and mutual position variants?

[GdC26]

At first a long monolog about the contact marks on the ribbon and now an explanation of an autopsy for replacing the ribbon!


Oh, man...show me some vaulted miniatur EK II ´s....not one but several? I cannot, because of the bad Dutch Internet Providers (with poor search functions), as you mensioned several times before on several threads from me!

You didn't convince me and I don't think you can....all I've heard are assumptions!

At least the piece is marked forever and only good for the garbage bin. This is often the verdict for the not texbook items......thanks anyway!

I'm confused - didn't you ask for (reasoned) opinions on your view that this boutonnière displays an EK I? From what I can see, the paricipants in this thread obliged, and especially Miro O explained why he disagrees with your assessment on this point. He and others also noted that the ribbon has been replaced (which you agree with) and Miro O concluded from that that given the construction of the piece, that may mean it is a put together.

None of these comments strike me as out of order, or outside of the bounds of the discussion, and especially Miro O has made a fairly extensive effort to explain the reasons for his views.

I understand these views are disappointing to you, and that you disagree with them is your prerogative. But I'm not sure I understand why you dismiss a reasoned view counter to your own as "mere assessments". If mere "I don't like it because I don't like it" will kill this forum (something I agree with), then so will dismissal of reasoned and reasonable observations just because they are at odds with your own views.

Just my five cents, nothing to do with the piece (on which I have no views), but everything to do with the way things are developing on the Forum.
Kind regards,
Sandro

[Green]

I'm confused - didn't you ask for (reasoned) opinions on your view that this boutonnière displays an EK I? From what I can see, the paricipants in this thread obliged, and especially Miro O explained why he disagrees with your assessment on this point. He and others also noted that the ribbon has been replaced (which you agree with) and Miro O concluded from that that given the construction of the piece, that may mean it is a put together.

None of these comments strike me as out of order, or outside of the bounds of the discussion, and especially Miro O has made a fairly extensive effort to explain the reasons for his views.

I understand these views are disappointing to you, and that you disagree with them is your prerogative. But I'm not sure I understand why you dismiss a reasoned view counter to your own as "mere assessments". If mere "I don't like it because I don't like it" will kill this forum (something I agree with), then so will dismissal of reasoned and reasonable observations just because they are at odds with your own views.


Just my five cents, nothing to do with the piece (on which I have no views), but everything to do with the way things are developing on the Forum.
Kind regards,
Sandro

If you have no vieuws on the piece ..........its just my 2 cents what you wrote!

Judge the piece and not the person

[Green]

IMO here are a few nice examples of vaulted EK I 1914 buttonbacks....note the EK II Buttonback.

godet4.jpg

[GdC26]

If you have no vieuws on the piece ..........its just my 2 cents what you wrote!

Judge the piece and not the person

I’m not judging you, I’m commenting on your dismissal of even reasoned criticism. This forum thrives on rational and respectful debate so if you believe the piece is good, by all means explain to why you believe that.

You acknowledge that the ribbon has been replaced, and Miro O quite reasonably in my view explained why given the construction of the piece, that may mean it may be a put together.

You have argued the front piece is an EK I because it is vaulted, Miro O has explained using several different and reasonable arguments why he believes that is not decisive. Rather than act offended or merely note that he has not convinced you, please offer reasons why you maintain the view that this is in fact an EK I (which it may be or may not be, as said, I hold no view). Or don’t if you wish, but then don’t complain about people invoking their gut to defend their views, because that one cuts both ways.

Kind regards,
Sandro

[morel5000]

I’m not judging you, I’m commenting on your dismissal of even reasoned criticism. This forum thrives on rational and respectful debate so if you believe the piece is good, by all means explain to why you believe that.

You acknowledge that the ribbon has been replaced, and Miro O quite reasonably in my view explained why given the construction of the piece, that may mean it may be a put together.

You have argued the front piece is an EK I because it is vaulted, Miro O has explained using several different and reasonable arguments why he believes that is not decisive. Rather than act offended or merely note that he has not convinced you, please offer reasons why you maintain the view that this is in fact an EK I (which it may be or may not be, as said, I hold no view). Or don’t if you wish, but then don’t complain about people invoking their gut to defend their views, because that one cuts both ways.

Kind regards,
Sandro

Please check the picture that Green posted of the Godet catalogue.

[Miro O]

IMO here are a few nice examples of vaulted EK I 1914 buttonbacks....note the EK II Buttonback.

[ATTACH]4671985[/ATTACH]

Thanks for the pic. At least some trace of a solid discussion. Now please show me where is written which one is EK1.

[VtwinVince]

Not sure where this thread is going, but as I stated earlier, there were no hard and fast rules for these private purchase minis.

[Green]

Summary:

- There were no hard and fast rules for these private purchase minis.

- This buttonback was probably never worn as is, just put together from parts in
different condition for collector´s purposes.

- Just my five cents, nothing to do with the piece (on which I have no views)

- I handled three EK 1870 minis of this type - mounted straight on the button,
hollow struck, two of them were also vaulted. The only but important difference
is that they were soldered onto the ring of metal button. All of them I sold as
EK2s

- Considering the straight mounted EK mini as EK1, is just applying TR rules into
Imperial era. Which is very tempting but tricky.

- Pushes such piece more into the area of Frankensteins than between repaired
original items

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

- I think it is a resent put together.

Not the reactions, you want to hear about a piece you show in a Thread. Nobody looked to the other side, just negative reactions and assumptions. Nobody say´s .... "it could just as well be". This is mostly the verdict for non textbook pieces....I deal with this several times before. It only makes me more affraid, to post my new purchased not texbook pieces......I think I am not the only one..500 viewers and 6 participants

To refer to the last comment...."Not sure where this thread is going to". So I let it go and accept the opinions about the piece.....it is what it is! A Frankenstein, put together between 1914 - 2014, only place to display..... the trash can

[Miro O]

Nobody looked to the other side, just negative reactions and assumptions. Nobody say´s .... "it could just as well be"...

EK miniature is a result of not only miniaturization, but of simplification as well.

The EK2 minis are mostly one-piecers, because it was very time and money consuming to make three piece awards in miniature size. These EK2 minis mostly have inline jumpring Grandcross style, because it is easier to produce and most durable suspension for that size. They can be one-sided (with blank reverse) to give the customer a cheaper alternative. And they can be vaulted just to offer him another option to choose.

But this doesn´t mean that every one-piece mini is Deumer or Schickle, every mini with inline jumpring is a Grandcross and every vaulted or one-sided cross can be EK1. The class of the Imperial EK buttonback can not be judged from the construction of the mini.

It is significant that those who believe in the opposite, always pick up only one or two features and ignore the rest that don´t fit to their theory. But those who judge the class by jumpring, should explain the existence of "Grand crosses" with noncombatant ribbon. Grand crosses were never awarded to civilians... And those who believe that all one-sided EK minis are EK1s should explain why this type appear also as pendant with jumpring. EK1s were not pendants and had no jumpring... And those who believe in vault, should explain why their "EK1 mini" is one-piecer and hollow struck. Ok, full size EK2s were not vaulted. But there were none hollow struck one-piece EK1s 1870 as well... So forget this full-size criteria in the world of miniatures. Here they don´t work.

As I stated before, it is possible, and it surely few times happened, that some veteran came to the jeweller shop, asked for EK1 mini and pointed his finger on something which was mostly sold as EK2 buttonback. And I believe he was served without discussion. Minis were not official, so it was on customer´s preferences and wallet what he took (single and one-sided minis were surely cheaper). But:

1. Such accidental veteran could choose the dangling mini as much as vaulted or straight mounted one for this purpose. So the construction or mount style played no role again.

2. Chances of something like that are very rare. At the beginning, the possibility ratio is ca. 1:37, as there were 1.300 EK1s 1870 awarded contrary to 48.000 EK2s. This quite rare possibility is further lowered by the fact, that EK1s were allowed to be worn on civilian dress in full size, which means not every veteran was interested in miniature variant of his EK1. So the quantitative theory speaks clearly: these EK minis (vaulted, one-sided, straight mounted) appear quite too often to be automatically considered representing such rarely awarded EK1s, which were on top of it allowed to be worn on civilian dress in full size.

Maybe it´s just me, but the minis should be bought, kept and sold described as what they are at worst, not at best. Until there is some solid outer evidence, like matching medal bar, or soldbuch.

The only criterium which works for me in imperial era is very simple. You have there one EK mini? It is very probably an EK2. You have them two? Then it is surely EK1 and EK2. So far I haven´t found a flaw on this rule. It works with buttonbacks of all mount types, rossettes and with chains as well. Look back at the chain in post Nr 10. The first mini (left one) is without any doubt an EK1 - but not because it is vaulted and probably also one-sided. The reason is that there are two EKs on that chain - so the first one must be EK1. And even if it was double-sided and flat, as long as there are two EK minis, the first one would still represent an EK1.

[Green]

This is why I believe a vaulted EK is an EK Class I. Of course there can be an exeception, but thats is an exeption on what you see in majority! Do with it what you want but that is my point of vieuw......not a lot of words but what I see in the real..collects over years

[ATTACH]4672678[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH]4672679[/ATTACH]