Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Bronwen, post: 429525, member: 5833&quot;]A cautionary tale about auction houses and misinformation.&nbsp; Just a couple of weeks ago I was made aware of a cameo coming up for auction by a firm that pride themselves on their expertise in antiquities and, unlike most others, allow returns if an item is not as described.&nbsp; An attractive, monochromatic hardstone piece in high relief, simply set, from an East Coast collection, Victorian, opening at around $2,000.&nbsp; The person who wrote to me about it did so because he knew what I could also immediately see: the cameo was by someone working now, and style of the setting indicated it was work from the last few years.</p><p><br /></p><p>Concerned that the piece would slip onto the engraved gem market &amp; be accepted as Victorian forever more, I wrote them, politely asked how they had determined it to be Victorian, including several links to sites where they could compare it to the modern work, &amp; suggesting they might want to reassess.</p><p><br /></p><p>Their acknowledgement said they would look into it, but piece had been consigned by a highly (that word again) reputable collector.&nbsp; Next message thanked me for the information, indicated they were sending it back to the reputable collector, and the lot was withdrawn.</p><p><br /></p><p>I was relieved.&nbsp; Auction houses are not always (maybe should say &#039;rarely&#039;) receptive to evidence that contradicts their description of something.&nbsp; Sotheby&#039;s did not want to hear it when someone I know who had spotted the discrepancy informed them a cameo they were offering, conspicuously signed on the front by a famous name, was blank shell in the same area when it had been auctioned by a lesser house just a few months before.&nbsp; They preferred to take the position that previous consignor, the auctioneers &amp; their photographer had all failed to notice the deeply engraved 7-letter name, even though the other auctioneer had noticed the much fainter marks on the back, which Sotheby&#039;s did not mention.</p><p><br /></p><p>Before:</p><p>[ATTACH=full]150407[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p>And after:</p><p>[ATTACH=full]150408[/ATTACH] </p><p><br /></p><p>The forged signature is not even a very good match to other specimens, but there will now be no talking anyone out of the belief they have a genuine Saulini because, after all, the mighty Sotheby&#039;s said it was.</p><p><br /></p><p>Auction house experts.&nbsp; Bah!&nbsp; Humbug![/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in