Not Every Mark Is a Maker’s Mark: Reading Hen on Nest Clues

Turn over enough hen on nest dishes and you will eventually find letters, numbers, circles, seams, scratches, stickers, and at least one mysterious bump that looks important only because you have been staring at it too long. Somewhere along the way, every collector asks the same hopeful question: “Is that the mark?” Sometimes it is. Sometimes it is just where the mold did something peculiar on a Tuesday afternoon.

A maker’s mark is an intentional name, logo, or symbol used to identify a company or production source. Familiar examples include Westmoreland’s intertwined WG, Imperial’s I-over-G trademark, Degenhart’s D inside a heart, Boyd’s B-in-a-diamond marks, and the underlined M found on Mosser’s chick salt. These marks can provide strong evidence, but they must be read in context. Companies changed marks, introduced them at different times, and did not necessarily mark every piece.

An unmarked hen is not automatically unidentified, inferior, or a reproduction. Indiana Glass hens were not molded with an Indiana company logo. L. G. Wright and Central hens may also be unmarked, while examples from Fenton, Degenhart, and Westmoreland may be found both marked and unmarked. Identification therefore has to include size, glass type, tail shape, nest design, rim treatment, and documented mold characteristics.

One of the most misunderstood features is the circular impression on the back of most Indiana Glass hens. It is commonly called a valve mark, but it is not a maker’s mark. According to research published by Indiana Glass Collectors, the circle was created by a valve used to eject the lid from the mold during automated production. Similar valve impressions appear on some Hazel-Atlas hens, so the circle supports an Indiana identification only when the rest of the mold details agree. A circle on a chicken is evidence—not a notarized confession.

Mold seams, trapped bubbles, straw marks, rough spots, and random depressions are also manufacturing features rather than company signatures. Mold numbers or isolated letters may have served internal production purposes, but they should not be assigned to a manufacturer unless a reliable reference documents that connection. Creativity is wonderful when decorating a shelf; it is considerably less helpful when inventing glass history.

Even genuine logos have complications. Glass molds were sold, transferred, altered, and reused. The National Milk Glass Collectors Society notes that original Westmoreland marks sometimes remained in molds later used by Rosso and Summit. A molded logo may therefore confirm the mold’s ancestry without proving when—or by whom—a particular piece was pressed.

Paper and foil labels are useful supporting evidence, but they can fall off, move between pieces, or be added later. Examine a suspected mark with angled light and photograph it from several directions. Then compare it with documented examples rather than whichever online listing has the most enthusiastic capital letters.

A mark should begin the investigation, not end it. Have a strange mark, number, label, or glass mystery in your collection? Describe it in the comments, and tell us what hen on nest subject you would like researched next.

Research Sources

• National Milk Glass Collectors Society: Studying a Glass Collection
• National Milk Glass Collectors Society: Westmoreland Marks
• Indiana Glass Collectors: Valve-Mark Explanation
• National Imperial Glass Collectors Society: Imperial History and Trademark
• Open Salts: Degenhart, Boyd, Mosser and Other Chick-Salt Marks