Antiqueman

Again, thanks for the responses.  The following pics are the so called Yellin tools.  I would like to hear your comments and thoughts.

Many thanks for the responses.  I have collected antique iron for 50+ years and have seen some obvious repos and undoubtedly purchased some.  In the case of the Yellin tools, They looked great, were represented by a so called reputable dealer as real. When I offered them for sale, a buyer was dubious, so I spent a lot of time on research I should have done to start with.  What convinced me that they were not authentic was the makers mark.  It was hard to find a real mark on the web, but after a discussion with Yellin's granddaughter, who immediately said that from the photo I sent,  the mark was not his.  The authentic mark was his name as a continuous raised name to be stamped into the steel.  What was on the tools I bought was the name stamped in one tool as individual letters and not spaced as might be expected.  I was able to find some offerings, on the internet, sold at auction and verified by the granddaughter, that showed the mark as it should be.  She also said that he marked each tool, not just one.  The handles had some inlaid cooper, and he did not work with copper in such a way.  Thus an expensive error.

All of these comments are very helpful and add to the list of clues to be pursued. Thank you! I have collected for about 45 years. Early on, the need to worry about repros was minimual because prices were low and antique iron was not highly sought. Time, money, and number of collectors has changed the demand side of the equation and the internet has changed the supply part of the equation. I always visit blacksmith shops and galleries when I find them and have never found these artisans to have interest in trying to duplicate an old item for the sake of fooling a collector. I have used a great deal of recent blacksmithed items for their utilitarian use and/or decorative or art value. I have iron railings inside and out, hooks, art, sculpture, all made by local artisans. Those items add to the graphic value of the antique work. I greatly respect the talent to fashion such items from such difficult material as iron and with such large, heavy, robust tools. Thus my interest. Those that are not familar with the Sorber Collection that was auction off by POOK & POOK in the last 2-4 years should look at the book that documents the collection. It is a wonderful reference book.

Some ironwork made during the Arts and Crafts Period is identifiable by short-cuts that were typically taken during that time period. If you turn the item over and see jagged edges around holes that were punched through and at the same time see it as a reasonably well made item that the maker did not spend the extra few seconds straightening elements, and the metal is possibly not anywhere near the minimum to make the object, and the item looks Colonial in style, then according to what I was shown you have a set of clues strongly indicating that it is likely a reproduction that was made during the Arts and Crafts Period. Many years ago a smith gave me a tour of items that were on display at an Early Ironwork Conference that had been identified by experts as real Colonial iron. When turned over, those iron pieces fell distinctly into two categories. One category was items with jagged edges on the back of punched holes, nice Colonial design and execution, but without that last 15 seconds or so of straightening. The second category were Colonial style items of nice design, minimal iron used, nice finished holes on the back, and someone had taken that final few seconds to eyeball the piece and align it so that it was straight. Even to my then uneducated eye those items fell into two distinct categories.

I don't understand what you mean by . My humble understanding is that if an object looks like it was "beat with a hammer" i.e. intentionally banged up and dented, then it is a modern reproduction. Original old ironwork (especially pre-Industrial Revolution high end decorative objects) that was taken care of and properly preserved should look well-made and if that item made for the upper end of the market should not have any visible hammer marks. Some modern makers will leave some hammer marks so that customers can see that the item was handmade. Some other makers will take items that were machine-made and bang up with hammers to try to make the items look to the untrained eye as if it was made by a smith. Still other makers will cast or use machines to punch-out items ready-made with dents for hardware store chains. Hammer marks are more likely than not to indicate that the item is a reproduction.

Interesting collection in your photo.. I dont know that I can tell you much though... Just about everything could be made just as it was 100-200-300 or even 500 years ago... If it was important enough you could find or make appropriate material and use methods to match...

Hello, I am a collector of antique iron-lighting, cooking items, tools, household items. Viewing iron to come to a conclusion of old vs new, domestive vs foreign requires knowledge of use and method of making the item as well as making the stock from which it was made. I am looking for help in understanding the processes and how to determine old from new and antique from new. Thanks

Antiqueman