Walking Stick Forum banner
1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I purchased this walking stick at an Estate Sale in Tennessee. I did some research and may have come across the approximate date it was made. Attached are pictures and a link to the document noting a walking stick with the persons name on it. Could you tell me the value of this walking stick?

The cane may have been given by Samuel Rowland Fisher to a Thomas Rogers around 1781.

Thank You. Here is the link https://books.google.com/books?id=ENULAAAAYAAJ&lpg=PA422&ots=OaaV3Y4UON&dq=walking%20stick%20tom%20rogers&pg=PA422#v=twopage&q&f=false
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
969 Posts
I worked in an art museum for most of my life. Appraisals must come from accredited appraisers. Market values are sometimes variable by the year. The most the curators at the museum would do is say if the piece looked "right." Within a margin of error, was it authentic? Were the materials common to a period, were there similar examples in style? And so forth.

If something does have a historical mention, the value goes up some. Understand that huge numbers of all sorts of artifact and art works were made, but were never part of any record. Often, the intrinsic quality of the item is less important than being mentioned in a history. If you can nail down the work's history, you may have something of better than average value.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
40 Posts
I purchased this walking stick at an Estate Sale in Tennessee. I did some research and may have come across the approximate date it was made. Attached are pictures and a link to the document noting a walking stick with the persons name on it. Could you tell me the value of this walking stick?

The cane may have been given by Samuel Rowland Fisher to a Thomas Rogers around 1781.
The script doesn't look to be from that time period.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
57 Posts
I am not an expert, but I think this walking stick is likely from the 19th or the 20th Century, not the 18th.

In the late 18th Century walking sticks were made to be elaborate according to the aristocratic European fashion trends of that era.

Ordinary folks imitated the high style of aristocrats.

I would like to reiterate what Bernard Levine, an expert in cutlery history and moderator of several cutlery history and authentication forums likes to repeat:

Just because an old object was made in a rural area, does not mean that it was necessarily crudely made, without much attention to details and without extensive finish.

It is a modern fantasy that assumes that the in the "good old days, when life was simpler", objects were crude and unfinished ("primitive").

If anything, everyday objects of old were more elaborate than those mass produced today.

His advise to buyers of antique objects is to look at the objects, rather the accompanying paperwork, and to buy the item, not the story which comes with it.

Ethnic, folksy carved canes did not become a trend until the 19th century.

The way the name is inscribed on the stick is also done a typical 20th Century "folksy" way (a shaved down section on the side of the shank with the bark left on). The inscription is also done in a very modern way. In the 18th and 19th Centuries elaborate or at least "pretty" penmanship was paramount even for the lower classes of society.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
57 Posts
A few tips for how to determine if the stick is made very recently or not:

https://www.realorrepro.com/article/Canes-and-walking-sticks

"The number of reproduction folk art canes in the market is growing rapidly. Cheap hand carved canes from Asia show the same tool marks, irregularities and lack of sophistication collectors usually look for in originals. Some imported canes are occasionally enhanced by adding American place-names such as cities and states, 19th century dates and American fraternal and patriotic symbols and emblems.

You can catch many imports by examining the wood. Traditional American folk art canes are almost always formed from a single piece of wood. There is no seam between the shaft and handle. Grain flows uninterrupted from the shaft into the handle because handles are formed by naturally occurring crotches or forks (Fig. 34). The majority of new folk art canes are made of two separate pieces. Even if the new cane is painted, the joint between handle and shaft is usually visible (Fig. 35).

Ultraviolet light is particularly useful for examining folk art canes. Most paints and stains made before mid-20th century look about the same under long wave ultraviolet light as they appear in visible, or room light. Many stains and paints used since the 1950s, especially those used since the 1980s, generally fluoresce brightly. Recently painted names, dates and other enhancements are also commonly revealed under ultraviolet light.

Recently glued enhancements also fluoresce. The glass eyes of the snake on the cover in Fig. 2, for example, are difficult to date mounted in the head. But bright fluorescence around the eyes indicate they have been recently set with glue. Even if the eyes are genuinely old, the new glue proves the cane has been altered.

Many new folk art canes are sold with rubber tips. In our samples, removing the rubber exposed bare wood. Areas of raw unfinished wood in the tip of the shaft are another warning sign of a new cane."

Hope this helps.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
969 Posts
I'm assuming the estate sale origin means there's no one to ask about from whom or where the piece came. A diary entry, or even a recollection would be valuable.

Possibly the name is the name of the person who made it, not the person who was given it. Reason why, see below.

I can't find any online images from the period and location that look like that. I did come across a mention of a gent in Philadelphia during that period using a malabar cane, but malabar cane for walking stick did usually not have sections, but was one long unjointed portion. The reference article indicated Mr. Fisher giving out quite a few canes, but I couldn't find any represented on the 'net. Auction houses, unfortunately, don't keep their catalogue online.

I also wonder about the signature. The abbreviation for Thomas at that time was Thos., not Tom. Also, I can't tell if it is handwritten or wood burnered. If handwritten, it looks nothing like the diary page by Mr. Fisher shown at Wikipedia. If wood burned, which might account for the clumsiness, it also seems like a later piece, as standard wire tipped wood burners were not common till after 1916. Don't know when Tom became a popular contraction for Thomas, but it makes me think the name was written later than the 18th century.
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
Top