Please take a look at this one and educate me on these ... is this one good or bad? It has had the ring repaired and the felt backing is actually darker than it appears in the photo. Thanks, Richard
-
-
Reverse -
Crown and repairComment
-
Date and WComment
-
Scan of FrontComment
-
Scan of Reverse with ribbon flipped overComment
-
This cross is good. Very nice sharp details to the cote. The frame is
a little beat up but that gives it that "been there-done that" apearence.
The style of repair to the small ring is typical of a period done repair.
The only red flag I see is the ribbon itself. It looks too clean to be 130
years old especially when you consider the condition of the frame of
the cross. You might want to do the black light test on it.
This is the nicest cross of the 3 posted.Comment
-
Thanks Greg - I have not had a black light since 1970. I believe the ribbon is original but not of the 1870 period. Probably re-mounted at a later date. I will get the last two EK2's posted tomorrow. The jubilee has similar characteristics so I am optimistic on that one. We shall see.
My head is hurting from going through the threads and figuring out what people think and why. I think I have gotten a grasp of some basic criteria used but must admit that the quality of the "fakes" is amazing to me. Of course, reading about these crosses made in different time frames and the lack of type examples with provenance and associated problematic issues makes your head spin or reach for the asperin. Or perhaps a glass of wine.
All opinions are welcome, good or bad, as the point is to learn. I love this forum.Comment
-
Love it - a one looker!
Keep up the research Richard and before long you will know just from looking at the crown and date whether there is any potential or not.
The core on this one is (literally) textbook.
MarshallComment
-
Very decent one, No 4 and 5 are also good.Comment
Comment