Do I need to add a first initial to my mark?

Ken - adding a first initial would add a greater level of certainty as to the maker's identification. Adding his or her given name in full would provide greater certainty yet. Can't you just imagine our poor newbie collector of the future, holding a beautiful antique bowie marked "J. WHITE", and scratching his head, pondering, "Is that John, Jake, Joseph, Jasper, Jared, Jane, Janice, Jennifer - heavens help, I am so perplexed!" Adding the maker's home town and state to the mark would certainly further the cause of certainty. As would adding his address and social security number.

Yes, yes, I know full well you have not advanced any proposition even remotely so absurd. My point is, there is always the possibility of uncertainty down the road, whether you add a first initial or not. You have proclaimed the use of surname alone - a procedure adopted by countless makers at all levels (not just "legends" as some have suggested) - to be deficient. I really don't see it that way.

Never seen a dead horse run quite this far.

Roger

PS - Don Hanson's knives should come with a health warning, because our future collector is going to have a positive seizure trying to make sense of that little sunfish. A mark which, in my estimation, is bloody brilliant.
 
Last edited:
RogerP said:
PS - Don Hanson's knives should come with a health warning, because our future collector is going to have a positive seizure trying to make sense of that little sunfish. A mark which, in my estimation in bloody brilliant.
Click to expand...



yo Rog, what is your take on Fogg's mark?
 
RogerP said:
Why, I think it's sublime.

Roger
Click to expand...



say werd, another maker that had gone to this is Elishewitz.

ScarabBLTJaguar.jpg
 
RogerP said:
Ken - adding a first initial would add a greater level of certainty as to the maker's identification. Adding his or her given name in full would provide greater certainty yet. Can't you just imagine our poor newbie collector of the future, holding a beautiful antique bowie marked "J. WHITE", and scratching his head, pondering, "Is that John, Jake, Joseph, Jasper, Jared, Jane, Janice, Jennifer - heavens help, I am so perplexed!" Adding the maker's home town and state to the mark would certainly further the cause of certainty. As would adding his address and social security number.

Yes, yes, I know full well you have not advanced any proposition even remotely so absurd. My point is, there is always the possibility of uncertainty down the road, whether you add a first initial or not. You have proclaimed the use of surname alone - a procedure adopted by countless makers at all levels (not just "legends" as some have suggested) - to be deficient. I really don't see it that way.

Never seen a dead horse run quite this far.

Roger

PS - Don Hanson's knives should come with a health warning, because our future collector is going to have a positive seizure trying to make sense of that little sunfish. A mark which, in my estimation, is bloody brilliant.
Click to expand...

I'm interested in why you think it's bloody brilliant? As I said earlier, I'm thinking there could be lots of next generation collectors scratching their heads over the mark.

Don choose it because his family has deep roots in the fishing industry in Florida and I he started off making working knifes for such. A very good reason in my opinion.
 
Kevin Jones said:
I'm interested in why you think it's bloody brilliant? As I said earlier, I'm thinking there could be lots of next generation collectors scratching their heads over the mark.
Click to expand...

You partially answer your own question below:

Kevin Jones said:
Don choose it because his family has deep roots in the fishing industry in Florida and I he started off making working knifes for such. A very good reason in my opinion.
Click to expand...

The mark is unique, emotive and meaningful to the maker. It is a beautiful little pictogram in and of itself, and a discreet addition to knives of tremendous elegance that would arguably be marred by a dog-tag dissertation of name, rank and serial number. The mark itself becomes part of the "lore", if you will, of this maker's work. It is readily known to collectors of today.

Collectors of tomorrow may just have to do a little work. Given the exponentially greater access to information we have today versus even 25 years ago, I hardly think tomorrow's collectors will be overly challenged by research such as this. If some think that is a flippant disregard on my part for our future brothers, so be it.

Roger
 
Last edited:
Roger
PS - Don Hanson's knives should come with a health warning, because our future collector is going to have a positive seizure trying to make sense of that little sunfish. A mark which, in my estimation, is bloody brilliant.
Click to expand...
Thanks, Roger! My wife scribbled the sunfish on a scrap piece of paper back in 96. I sent the drawing to a stamp maker and had a couple made. It has worked great and I have no plans to change.

P.S. The other reason of the stamp; One of my favorite past times is, catching 'Bluegill', or if you're from the south, 'Bream'. Fishing is in my blood :D
 
If collectors, years from now have the internet, I don't think they will have
any trouble identifying one of Nick's or mine.
 
I know I'm late to the party, but....

The bottom line is that there is no guarantee of future knife identification, no matter how much information is on the stamp. Early on, I had a well known and well respected dealer tell me that my little "BF" logo would never do, and I needed to change it to a full name, city, state, etc. Maybe that was good advice, maybe not. The way I look at it, if 20, 30 or 100 years from now, no one knows who made my knives, well then I didn't do my job.

If a knife by Larry Feugen (LF), Wayne Goddard (WG), Ed Fowler (EF), Bailey Bradshaw (symbol), Don Fogg (gold blossom), Don Hanson (sunfish), etc., etc., can't be identified 100 years from now with just what's on the blade now, then no amount of additional info will make that knife more than a curiosity.

If a future owner of a knife can only trace who made it by the information on the blade, it will satisfy his curiosity - nothing more. If the knife can't be identified the smallest, most discreet mark, then it's never going to be worth anything.

I did cover myself by putting all that gratuitous information on the sheath, just in case I'm dead wrong....:)
 
Nice counterpoints, Ken. I see both sides, and they are convincing arguments.

I still think, in this age (and the future) it will be less necessary to have such provenance as text. By then there may be a single library repository of custom knives.

Don't the old English cutlers all have a series of hallmarks that have been catalogued, so the identity is not a mystery. Wouldn't that be similar? That's a 150 year old system that works.

Marks are an area that can add appeal in their simplicity and style, and definitely subtract with the placement and size. Lord knows how many clunky marks we have all seen, both in logos and names.

Coop
 
Even a makers full name and address doesn't guaranty that 20 years from now anyone will know who that maker is. I've seen many cases where someone shows a photo of a makers mark that includes this information, looking for some background on the maker, and gets no replies. It all depends on how well known the maker was.

I certainly have no problem with most of the marks I have seen that include all that stuff, and it does make it easier for future generations to do research.
 
In any event, I believe in the near future there will be depository for maker marks for all maker's that care to participate.

This will no doubt help down the road in giving enthusiast one place to research these marks.
I'm really surprised at how many marks some makers have used.

More to come on this subject.
 
Well, since this is still going, and mention has been made of how the old English cutlers kept a record of marks... Look at the Japanese... They can tell you who made what sword, when and from what school they learned and/or founded.... for the past, what, 600 years? And even if a blade gets broken and remade into something smaller, they've kept the information regarding the various styles and can often at least tell you the school from which the blade arose...

As has been said, with the advent of the 'net, as long as it's accessible, I believe a hundred years from now, it should be relatively easy for a resourceful collector to figure out who made what knife based on whatever mark a maker uses... And if Kevin's idea of a mark registry takes hold, it'll be easier...

Now, I need to go see what mark Nick used for mine... :D
 
I believe Don makes a valid point about the power of computers to unravel identities. My wife is a title officer, and what she can pry out of cyber space about identifications (especially the dead) always amazes. This is why J. White is much better than White and J. W. White is more useful than J. White. Throw in a town and state and I think she could write a life history.

Nevertheless, maker ID should not rest on individual computer skills. For me, if the discourse on this thread demonstrates anything, it's that the time for a master index of marks has come. Uniqueness would be the only requisite of a mark, assuring every maker his place in history and clarity for buyers/collectors. Moreover, such a measure is foundational to authenticating a new discipline, which at a bare minimum must be able to identify those upon whom it depends.

ken
 
Last edited:
I get a lot of questions about "which" Fowler I happen to be related to

none AFAIK

Jerry Van Eizenga nicknamed me "Crowbar" so I had the F in Fowler stylized as a crowbar and use that as my mark. Unique enough, who knows, but I really like it.

fowler_c08_01_lowres.jpg
 
Lol, Burt. I do think that too much mark can detract from the visual appeal of a knife and in the long run it's the maker's style and quality of work that is going to create future demand. It'll still probably be up to experts to examine the nuances of a knife to determine it's authenticity and whether it was crafted by "the legend" himself or a student or someone working in his style. Going just by the mark though I think it would be easier to have a symbol or distinctive initials to get some primary feedback as to who the maker might be.

Most makers though won't achieve that status, even though more might currently achieve a high degree of fame. I can imagine a young fellow inheriting a blade from his grandfather in 30 or 40 years and thinking, "Wow, a Wheeler, must be Nick, I'm rich!" :p If he's not so lucky and it turns out to be a Bubba Wheeler, and there were a few smiths using the same "WHEELER" mark who had no definitive style and whose popularity has been lost to time, it might be more difficult to determine which "other" Wheeler was the actual craftsman. With a B WHEELER mark he might have a better chance to find out it was Bubba, his granddad's old fishing buddy the made the blade.
 
i dont think there will be a problem identifying makers work that rose to popularity during the internet age.
 
stephanfowler said:
I get a lot of questions about "which" Fowler I happen to be related to

none AFAIK

Jerry Van Eizenga nicknamed me "Crowbar" so I had the F in Fowler stylized as a crowbar and use that as my mark. Unique enough, who knows, but I really like it.

fowler_c08_01_lowres.jpg
Click to expand...


Hey, I like that knife! ;) :thumbup:
 
RogerP said:
Collectors of tomorrow may just have to do a little work.
Roger
Click to expand...

Where do I fall in the collector category? Don't worry guys, I'll make sure everyone knows who the sunfish guy is.

I think in most cases there should be name. I think on Don's knives, it just adds style the way he does it and its part of what is so unique about them.

Nick, You could always use a little computer picture on the blade in order to be in with future collectors. And because there are more of your knives in the internet then in real life :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top