[samg]

Jacknola
Thanks for your well thought out and presented observations.
In any endeavor of discovering the facts about anything, it has to be done in an unbiased way, so that no matter where the evidence leads, it is a place where it can be accepted, because of the evidence.
I do know that this early RMK sheath debate has been going on for a long while, and without the smoking gun evidence that Heiser had a stamp, then there are some who will not accept it, no matter how compelling the evidence. I understand that too, because the claim that Heiser did not possess a stamp, comes from the source, so I completely understand that position. But with the same source claiming that Johnson was not found till 1962, we have a conflict, obviously.


Speaking of smoking gun, when I got involved in this debate, I started doing my own sleuthing, and I have found a very interesting little bit of info that should perk everyone's ears up...unless this is general knowledge.
I have found a person who was among Heisers last employees when they closed in 1980. Hold on fellas....This person bought all of the stamps, dies, and equipment that Heiser owned going way back.
We had an interesting conversation about Randall knives, I told him what our investigation was about, and as he likes Randall's too, it piqued his interest.
I asked him if Heiser, and he prefers for himself the company to be referred to as Heiser, though it had been bought, it still retained Heiser in its name. Just his preference. I guess kind of like Daimler- Mercedes, I still refer to them as Mercedes. Just old school I guess. Plus with Heisers historical relavence to American History, I will refer to them as Heiser.
When I asked him if Heiser retained stamps that were used for other companies, or were they sent back to the other companies when that business relationship was ended, he said that he was not sure. He bought all this equipment and stamps and dies years ago, and there are many boxes that he has still in storage that he hasn't gotten into, but because of my inquiry, he said that he may look into it.
He was a saddle maker so he isn't too knowledable about the knife sheath stuff, but he does have some of those too. At this point he doesn't know if he has Randall sheath dies or not. I will check in with him from time to time, and he told me that if he found anything, he would call me.

Moving forward, if you will, I would like to try and establish some guidelines that I feel are unbiased, that can help us keep focused on the observations and not apply the term fact, till its debated and verified or debunked.
It will also prevent arguments. Stick with point-counterpoint. This research is not about ego, who is right or wrong, its about establishing a Randall history for these RMK sheaths. Not based on opinion, but on fact.

Here is my guideline. Feel free to add or alter, but its important to keep it simple and unbiased.

1) If an opinion can be backed with substantial evidence ( as done with the stamp orientation- number style stamp evidence) without substantial evidence that refutes it, it becomes fact until evidence to the contrary is uncovered.

2). If an opinion can be refuted by substantial evidence, it can't be held as fact, only opinion. I say this because no matter how much evidence is provided, ego may get into the way.

3) For an opinion to be held as fact, evidence must be presented that can be substantiated without significant opposing evidence.( Such as Heiser using serif number stamps, or Johnson using non serif number stamps.)

4) Observations that are used to distinguish the two sheath makers can't be considered fact if both makers display same characteristics .That stance only leads to personal argument, and it muddys the water.

This would eliminate claims of "vast experience" or"years of handling sheaths" from being able to be used as a crutch to fall back on.

This research should be done in the light of wanting to establish the truth, not to prove ones position.
Moving forward, I would greatly appreciate the contribution of everyone, so that if we can come to the point where the evidence trail, not the opinion trail, leads us closer to what really went on in those early RMK years. It may lead right back to the undetermined place, but a lot of groundwork or foundation has been laid. Let's walk on it and see where it leads.
And please....no egos need to post here. No name calling, insinuations, etc. Stick to the points. If an observation is made, reply to that observation, keep it clean and concise. If someone tries to divert the conversation, hopefully a moderator will remove it.

Thanks again Jack for your response and body of work that you presented. I believe that my observation of number stamp styles just may be a link that joins it all together. But that is an opinion at this point, not a fact.
I started a thread on another forum that was basically 3 pages of my observations with the help of one insightful member that helped. But an open challenge to find evidence that debunked my observations. None so far, so you know how that is, no answer is a screaming answer. With all the talented collectors with the experience and pertinent sheaths, with no contradictory evidence to debunk it, I feel at this point that I am onto something. Time will tell. These number stamp observations have only been an observation, not positioned as truth. I have absolutely no ego or motives other than trying to logically get to the bottom of it.

Thanks

Sam Granade