Help with ID on this button !!

[DIGGING1971GUY]

Just dug this what looks to be some kind of naval button ,i looked but could not find this exact one
Any help would be appreciated and thanks in advance .
Sorry about the image loading ,for some reason i could not insert an image .This button is about quarter size or a little bigger
I did not picture the back because it is completely gone .

http://i51.tinypic.com/2psgms4.jpg

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

DR.ÖTEK Metal Detector, Waterproof Gold Detector, Pinpoint & Terrain Modes, Professional Metal Detector - Grab it through Amazon!

[High Plains Digger]

I don't know, BigCy, but for us guys who don't know crap about CW buttons (Well, yes, I do mean me), you gotta agree that this could raise the old lead in the pencil a couple of degrees! It is the harsh realization of the truth that hurts the most. And making a trip to JOANN's. I wish I would have made a video of that!

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

A Handbook of Civil War Bullets and Cartridges - Grab it through Amazon!

[TheCannonballGuy]

Creskol wrote:
> I wonder how many companies manufacture the same button

Here's yet another example, as sold by La Mode, a Fashion-buttons retailer. Note that the back of the cards in the second photo (attached below) say "La Mode Buttons - The Fashion Choice For More Than 100 years - Blumenthal & Co. - Carlstad, NJ".

One (of several) of the ID-clues for the Fashion-button version of the US Navy emblem is that the tops of the eagle's wings are quite "rounded" -- but are "pointy" on actual US Navy buttons' eagle.

 

[TheCannonballGuy]

In addition to the ID-clue (wing-tops are quite "rounded") that I mentioned in my reply to Creskol, here are two more ID-clues:
As I've said elsewhere in this forum, and as BigCypressHunter mentioned in this discussion-thread, "the loop on the anchor is the main give away." I'll describe that ID-clue in detail.

On all of the actual US Navy buttons with the "horizontal" anchor, the "rope border" goes through the loop/ring at the anchor's top. (See the close-up photo, attached below.) On nearly all of the civilian Fashion buttons, the rope-border doesn't go through the loop/ring.

I say "nearly all" because I've seen one version of (definite) Fashion-button which does have the rope going through the loop/ring. But whenever you see the rope-border not going through the horizontal anchor's loop/ring, you know it's a Fashion-button.

Sidenote: The button-book by Alphaeus Albert does show one US Navy "horizontal" anchor button with the rope-border not going through the anchor's loop/ring. (See his book's NA-114.) I believe Albert is mistaken about that button being an actual US Navy button. Apparently, button-book author Warren Tice and I are in agreement that it's an error, because that button is not included in Tice's book.

The other clue:
Unlike the Fashion-buttons, actual US Navy 2-piece buttons are made of thick sheet-brass, and are thus heavier and "sturdier," in order to withstand the rigors of Military service. In comparison, the Fashion-buttons tend to be lighter weight, cheaply-made, and more flimsy-ly constructed than the actual Military version.

 

[creskol]

Just for fun, study the many differences in the four buttons from the junk box. (anchors, cannonballs, borders, etc..)

 

[Bigcypresshunter]

Just for fun, study the many differences in the four buttons from the junk box. (anchors, cannonballs, borders, etc..)

I dont remember the date the US Navy buttons turned the head. I think 1941. But we are getting into a whole different button. The pictures below are all authentic US Navy. The OPs fashion button is most easily recognized by the anchor ring as CBG described..

Try to solve this one. http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php/topic,209855.0.html

 

[TheCannonballGuy]

BigCypressHunter wrote:
> I dont remember the date the US Navy buttons turned the head. I think 1941.

May 14, 1941, according to the Albert button-book. On that date, the official Regulations for the emblem on US Navy buttons was changed, specifying that the eagle's head henceforward be facing toward the eagle's right side (instead of toward its left, which had been the specification since about 1850).

So, all four of Creskol's buttons seem to be "real" US Navy buttons, manufactured sometime after May 14, 1941. That being said, I'm not sure whether the one at lower left is a Fashion button or not. The very-rounded top of the wings usually means a Fashion button.

Creskol, I'd like to see a photo of the backs of your four buttons.

BCH, I'll take a look at the other discussion-thread you mentioned.

 

[creskol]

Creskol, I'd like to see a photo of the backs of your four buttons.

Here are the backs

 

[Bigcypresshunter]

Creskol, I'd like to see a photo of the backs of your four buttons.

Here are the backs

I could be wrong but I think at least 3 are post 1941 US Navy. Thanks for showing some of the variations caused by different manufacturers.

I cant read the floppy shank one on the bottom left but its suspect.

 

[TheCannonballGuy]

Creskol, thank you making and posting the additional photo. It confirms what I initially thought. The button at lower left is a Fashion button. Note the weak detail on the front, and the flimsy loop construction, and the weakly-struck backmark. BigCypressHunter, that backmark says "Fine Quality" ...a backmark almost never seen on Military buttons but often seen on Civilian ones.

The other three buttons are all 1941-or-later actual US Navy buttons, and despite the "Superior Quality" and "Hilborn-Hamburger Inc./NY" backmarks, all three of them were made using the same Waterbury Button Company strking-die design. This is another case of buttons being made by a major button-manufacturer but backmarked with the name of a "military goods dealer/supplier." I'm certain about that because fronts of these three buttons and the 1941-or-later Waterbury button are absolutely identical except for a few nearly-microscopic details. (Such nearly-microsopic differences occur even in the US Mint's striking-dies, such as teeny-tiny variations in Lincoln's hair on pennies over a period of decades.) For examples of the identical-ness, note the distinctively prominent "brow ridge" above the eagle's eye, and the presence of the four ball-shaped feathers which are grouped in a diamond-shaped pattern between the eagle's legs.

 

[Bigcypresshunter]

Creskol, thank you making and posting the additional photo. It confirms what I initially thought. The button at lower left is a Fashion button. Note the weak detail on the front, and the flimsy loop construction, and the weakly-struck backmark. BigCypressHunter, that backmark says "Fine Quality" ...a backmark almost never seen on Military buttons but often seen on Civilian ones.

The other three buttons are all 1941-or-later actual US Navy buttons, and despite the "Superior Quality" and "Hilborn-Hamburger Inc./NY" backmarks, all three of them were made using the same Waterbury Button Company strking-die design. This is another case of buttons being made by a major button-manufacturer but backmarked with the name of a "military goods dealer/supplier." I'm certain about that because fronts of these three buttons and the 1941-or-later Waterbury button are absolutely identical except for a few nearly-microscopic details. (Such nearly-microsopic differences occur even in the US Mint's striking-dies, such as teeny-tiny variations in Lincoln's hair on pennies over a period of decades.) For examples of the identical-ness, note the distinctively prominent "brow ridge" above the eagle's eye, and the presence of the four ball-shaped feathers which are grouped in a diamond-shaped pattern between the eagle's legs.

Yes I agree. 3 authentic US Navy and one suspect.
(And you noticed that before you saw the backmarks).


I actually have a Great Seal button with the "FINE QUALITY" backmark and its listed in "American Military Button Makers and Dealers: Their Backmarks& Dates" but I agree with you that this one is suspect. (Its most likely non-military) http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php/topic,212590.msg2872340.html#msg2872340

 

[creskol]

This has been a wonderful thread to follow, and to participate in. Thanks to all of you who joined in to make this a great educational discussion.