CN button

[Marty-Graw]

bought a bag of buttons today at the flea market and found this in the mix.......I would appreciate any info you may have on this........front is just like the CSN buttons but only has the CN....I have seen a few of the cuff size buttons in my research but so far haven't came acroos a coat size.....back says "COURTNEY & TENNENT CHARLESTON S.C." thanks in advance

 

[Bigcypresshunter]

I have something else to add about the Scovill backmarks. If I could post the page in Tice's button book without infringing copyright, I would.

Part of dating the Scovill backmarks is whether it is Mfg, Mf'g, MFG, Mf'g. etc. and part of it is whether it is a ring of dots, a single ring, a two rings... also the size of the letters. Also whether it is dots or stars that separate words, etc. There are dozens of variants.


Post a photo of the back of the marines button.



-Buckles

Thanks BB. I may need to be more careful about the pics I post that may be violating copyright laws. I hear its an easy lawsuit for those looking.

 

[Marty-Graw]

I'm trying to get a pic of the back but I can't get it close enough to see well enough

 

[vayank54]

Thanks Big C Civil war buttons have been my main interest since I started detecting. It wasn't long before I got into the earlier buttons though. I hope I never come across as a smart aleck or a know it all and if I do I hope someone wiill let me know. I really don't like using most internet sites for backmark ID's as most I've seen are either really general or have a lot of mistakes.
Buckleboy is right There are a lot of variations of the backmarks and sometimes they are really hard to tell apart. Also like Big C said the use of earlier backs with later faces sometimes makes it difficult as well.

 

[Bigcypresshunter]

After rereading the inkspot link, I realize they may be in error.

 

[vayank54]

It's Co. I blew the pic up to make sure I wasn't wrong.

 

[Kieth-Tx]

On the CN button...another issue is the 2 different text sizes for the CN and they are offset of the center of the anchor shaft....Alberts button pic shows same text size and centered. There is a backmark though that matches yours.

 

[Bigcypresshunter]

It's Co. I blew the pic up to make sure I wasn't wrong.

So this link is wrong too? http://pw1.netcom.com/~jimyce/bm.html

 

[Bigcypresshunter]

On the CN button...another issue is the 2 different text sizes for the CN and they are offset of the center of the anchor shaft....Alberts button pic shows same text size and centered. There is a backmark though that matches yours.

There is an authentic backmark in Alberts that matches?

 

[vayank54]

That site is too general. It doesn't state if they mean indented backmarks or RMDC (Raised Mark in Depressed Channel) backmark. It also doesn't say if there are ring of dots or anything like that. Post civil war buttons can have a capitol O but the indented SCOVILL MF'G Co WATERBURY is always post civil war. Also on that site they have WATERBURY BUTTON CO. Most buttons with that backmark indented are post civil war while the RMDC backmarks are civil war and earlier. Most civil war period waterbury buttons with an indented mark will have WATERBURY BUTTON CO EXTRA. The exception is if it has extra but also has a ropelike looking ring around the shank. That dates just after the civil war.

 

[Bigcypresshunter]

That site is too general. It doesn't state if they mean indented backmarks or RMDC (Raised Mark in Depressed Channel) backmark. It also doesn't say if there are ring of dots or anything like that. Post civil war buttons can have a capitol O but the indented SCOVILL MF'G Co WATERBURY is always post civil war. Also on that site they have WATERBURY BUTTON CO. Most buttons with that backmark indented are post civil war while the RMDC backmarks are civil war and earlier. Most civil war period waterbury buttons with an indented mark will have WATERBURY BUTTON CO EXTRA. The exception is if it has extra but also has a ropelike looking ring around the shank. That dates just after the civil war.

What does indented mean? On the common backmark site they dont have any Scovill past 1865.

I guess the 2nd button in the inkspot link is off by 5 years.

 

[Kieth-Tx]

On the CN button...another issue is the 2 different text sizes for the CN and they are offset of the center of the anchor shaft....Alberts button pic shows same text size and centered. There is a backmark though that matches yours.

There is an authentic backmark in Alberts that matches?

Yeah...it shows

A.Courtney & Tennent/S.C./Charleston
Av. Courtney &/Tennent

Not an expert...just have a book.

 

[Kieth-Tx]

BCH-What does indented mean? On that site they dont have any Scovill past 1865.


The backmarks of this CN button is "indented"

 

[vayank54]

By indented I mean the backmark is stamped.
The C&T backmarks in Albert's books is on what he call unauthenticated confederate buttons. They are repro's If anyone has Tice's Guide to Button Prices & Detecting Fake & Repro buttons it shows the button in there.

 

[Bigcypresshunter]

BCH-What does indented mean? On that site they dont have any Scovill past 1865.


The backmarks of this CN button is "indented"

OK not raised.

 

[Bigcypresshunter]

On the CN button...another issue is the 2 different text sizes for the CN and they are offset of the center of the anchor shaft....Alberts button pic shows same text size and centered. There is a backmark though that matches yours.

There is an authentic backmark in Alberts that matches?

Yeah...it shows

A.Courtney & Tennent/S.C./Charleston
Av. Courtney &/Tennent

Not an expert...just have a book.

I meant does it have a backmark with this same font? (I posted a link with this backmark but the lettering font is way different)

 

[vayank54]

On the CN button...another issue is the 2 different text sizes for the CN and they are offset of the center of the anchor shaft....Alberts button pic shows same text size and centered. There is a backmark though that matches yours.

There is an authentic backmark in Alberts that matches?

Yeah...it shows

A.Courtney & Tennent/S.C./Charleston
Av. Courtney &/Tennent

Not an expert...just have a book.

I meant does it have a backmark with this same font?

The C&T backmark like the one on the navy button is in Albert's book on what he calls unauthenticated confederate buttons. They are repro's If anyone has Tice's Guide to Button Prices & Detecting Fake & Repro buttons it shows the button in there

 

[Kieth-Tx]

The C&T backmark like the one on the navy button is in Albert's book on what he calls unauthenticated confederate buttons. They are repro's If anyone has Tice's Guide to Button Prices & Detecting Fake & Repro buttons it shows the button in there

[/quote]

Vayank54 is correct. Kinda confused as to why he didn't reference this earlier, and if I missed it...sorry Vayank 54...but it shows this EXACT button in Alberts...page 364, button CS 75...face and back and shank type listed as he described as "Unauthenticated "Confederates"". It is still listed though as a RV2.

 

[Iron Patch]

I'm sorry to say your button is a repro. I think it was in the 1960's that 4 different types of CS navy buttons were reproduced. These buttons could be found everywhere. You can tell it's a repro by the dull detail, the shape of the button, the backmark and shank. The still have a bit of value. I've sold them, as repros, on ebay and they have gone for about $10 each.

I should have went with my gut (not that I said it was real) not having a good feeling about the back/shank. The thing is I've never been exposed to repro. CW buttons, just plates. The beauty of digging it yourself at an old site huh!

 

[IronSpike]

The C&T backmark like the one on the navy button is in Albert's book on what he calls unauthenticated confederate buttons. They are repro's If anyone has Tice's Guide to Button Prices & Detecting Fake & Repro buttons it shows the button in there

Vayank54 is correct. Kinda confused as to why he didn't reference this earlier, and if I missed it...sorry Vayank 54...but it shows this EXACT button in Alberts...page 364, button CS 75...face and back and shank type listed as he described as "Unauthenticated "Confederates"". It is still listed though as a RV2.
[/quote]

Page 363 Albert, Unauthenticated "Confederates": A consignment of four different Navy buttons was received here in 1969, from the London firm of Gall & Pearl, Ltd. Later, in 1970, two different buttons were offered by another London firm, C. S. S. Alabama, Ltd.

Still a neat button and being non dug it is in good condition. Interesting as Kieth-Tx points out it is listed RV2.