Most definitely, 100% not a fake.

Purchased from a very reputable European antiquities dealer, absent of any indicators that would suggest a forgery (with every indicator for authenticity being present). It very well may be older than 18c (by a good bit), but I am inclined towards thinking it to be early 18th Century until proven earlier. There isn´t any question that it is not any later than that.



I haven´t a clue how you determine the age of the frame as making the painting ´´later´´. A frame doesn´t indicate much.



Here are pictures of the reverse.

I would think the seal says Antwerp ienis? Thought it doesn´t look like an A. I think it´s probably latin for Antwerp. The seal might be from the guild of artists of Antwerp. Also, the date what makes you think it´s 18 century ( 1700-1800)? The figures do not reflect that date at all even if you consider that they may have been done by a Flemish/Belgian, Dutch folk artist? Have you considered it might be a deliberate fake the seal being added to add ´´age´´? I guess you can tell by looking at the age of the board. Obviously the frame is modern. Did you buy from a reputable dealer? Let´s hope it works out.

Can you please post the upper left ( just the three faces) in greater detail also the pitcher on the table ( a detail). I´m looking for the manner of painting in the faces and the type of porcelain on the table ( Kangi other?) Most likely the porcelain is going to tell you roughly when the piece was painted. What about that musical instrument? Is it a mandolin? guitar? other? You can also tell from the instrument what century this is likely to be.

What I would start with are the figures, they don´t look right to me for the date you are seeking. It´s a rural painting ( that is most likely was done not in or near an urban center-where schools of art and artists would have shared manners and techniques like perspective, color, anatomy etc. I would say it is an untrained/ not formally trained artist. ( like our American folk art). The seal does look pretty good. You can find the motif for the center of the seal with research. Also the frame, can be easily changed but it a good beginning point and part of the overall history of the piece. I would definitely try to check the subjects manner of dress and go from there.

Just because the gallery/vendor you bought it from is reputable doe/does not mean it is what they say it is. I had a clients painting the other day. They purchased it as an oil on board and its an oil on canvas on board and effects the value to a LARGE degree. The gallery is honest, according to the person at Christies I spoke to ´´they are very reputable´´ They just made a mistake.

How does the back of this piece fit into the frame? What type of nails or adhesive do you have? Is the adhesive rabbit glue or something else. This will also give you info.

Hope you didn´t pay too much because the value is usually in the piece not the age. Still it is quaint.

It absolutely is what it says it is.

There aren´t any indicators to suggest that it isn´t, other than an inherent cynicism Americans seem to have about anything that is over 200 years old.



I too would really like to know your area of expertise and whatever bona-fides might be attendant with it. With all respect due and with careful caveat to any presumptions I may dare to make, I would mention that your ´´advice´´ comes off as being extraordinarily superficial and completely unsophisticated; precisely the sort of thing one might find in books like this.







Your assessment here...

http://www.findartinfo.com/artforum/topic~TOPIC_ID~1825.asp 

...was absolutely abysmal and so completely off base I literally laughed out loud.



Those who´ve been around ´´experts´´ or who themselves may be an ´´expert´´ can usually spot a brother in knowledge from a mile away... Those who presume to pass themselves off as experts- qualified only within the spectrum of their own minds- fool only those who don´t know any better.

quote:

---

Originally posted by jillh2001


I think the only Dummy here is the one with the painting he claims as being of a different century than it is! The works I appraise aren´t always beautiful or valuable but I know how to find the value. Basically, it´s knowing about research.



On the positive side, I like combing the site, there are lots of good questions and useful to me as I make my living appraising art so I like to know what the client is thinking and what questions come up.



There are always those off centered on forums that´s to be expected.



Last I heard, there wasn´t one certified appraiser in your city in Florida in any of the three appraisal organizations so it´s obvious you are worried about your bona fides. Hey I was trying to help you but I won´t again. Have a nice day and learn about what you buy beforehand or you will get stuck with similar pictures.



I laughed out loud at your lack of knowledge of your own painting.



I think what really bothers you is your own lack of knowledge so you challenge someone else. If you don´t agree why not just disgard it, because your own ego is large in relation to your knowledge. I was being kind about it being quaint. I wouldn´t pay for that painting with a broken dish.

---

That was, basically, the exact sort of reply I expected from you.

Smoke, chest puffing, insulting the art and distracting the issue without naming a single bona-fide that might qualify you to speak about anything.



Unfortunately, people like you are becoming more and more prevalent in the lower levels of the arts (your neighborhood ´´Appraisers Association of America Member´´ types).

Though the internet has given them a broader platform to spread their under qualification, misinformation, errors and the Antiques Roadshow has emboldened them to feel qualified, they usually don´t go any further than that.



The only people who lose are the poor laypeople who know nothing about art, bring it to someone like that thinking them to be an ´´expert´´ and get a completely inaccurate assessment on their pieces.

quote:

---

the seal being added to add ´´age´´? [B)]

---

quote:

---

Obviously the frame is modern. [B)]

---

quote:

---

though religious paintings are worth much less than a similar piece by the same artist that is not religious ( this is due to the fact that fewer people are religious these days)[B)]

---

quote:

---

Don´t know this artist but it is done with a modern hand. That is some of the techniques were not used during this period.[B)]

---

quote:

---

If you must clean a spot yourself, use spit. I am not kidding. And use your finger to rub it in.[B)][B)][B)]

---

quote:

---

Also, it doesn´t seem abstract enough to be Dali[B)]

---

And that´s just a sample of some of your gems, excluding all of the other posts where you are slumming for people to send you money for a ´´certified appraisal´´.



Behold the product of dreadfully low standards of accreditation.

If you like, you can have the last word here. I really have no desire to sit and argue with a strip-mall appraiser who consistently gives bad advice.

I think the only Dummy here is the one with the painting he claims as being of a different century than it is! The works I appraise aren´t always beautiful or valuable but I know how to find the value. Basically, it´s knowing about research.



On the positive side, I like combing the site, there are lots of good questions and useful to me as I make my living appraising art so I like to know what the client is thinking and what questions come up.



There are always those off centered on forums that´s to be expected.



Last I heard, there wasn´t one certified appraiser in your city in Florida in any of the three appraisal organizations so it´s obvious you are worried about your bona fides. Hey I was trying to help you but I won´t again. Have a nice day and learn about what you buy beforehand or you will get stuck with similar pictures.



I laughed out loud at your lack of knowledge of your own painting.



I think what really bothers you is your own lack of knowledge so you challenge someone else. If you don´t agree why not just disgard it, because your own ego is large in relation to your knowledge. I was being kind about it being quaint. I wouldn´t pay for that painting with a broken dish.

Please post more of your velvet Elvis type pictures for further analysis. And you are wrong on all counts of your hypothesis of what type of appraisal and accreditation. As your tastes in art speak volumes of your bona fides. Bad art, bad taste, ah no big deal no one harmed.

I´d kinda like to know too... This one is very odd (and presently stuck in customs [:(] )

Thank you so very much arb.

I will most definitely watch that link! (and ask for a translation should anyone be able to provide any information [:D])



Also, thank you for the primer on seals. I know absolutely nothing about them, so your information was extremely valuable!

I sure hope we can decipher this seal!

Is there any one else who has paintings containing a wax seal and knows the significance of such?



Well finally we have another painting with a seal

LSMorgan, I took the liberty of putting a link to your seal on the forum for Antwerp local history, where professionals and amateurs exchange knowledge. The text may have been ´´Sigillum communitatis Antverpiensis´´, seal of the town Antwerp. A personal seal would have contained a clear coat of arms. It is obviously not a clerical seal either. Let´s hope someone in Antwerp has a clue. Here´s the link, so you may monitor the reactions:



http://www.geschiedenisvanantwerpen.be/forum/viewtopic.php?p=892#892 



Seals were mostly used as marks of property and are today valuable proofs of authenticity for the art world. Our king William II in 1850 had to auction his huge collection with fabulous Rembrandts and all these bear his seal. It was a common Dutch custom, and in German auctions you see even more seals of noble families. Some succesfull 19th C. painters used seals themselves to avoid imitation.

The topic monitor Ms.Marinus informs us on the site that it is indeed the seal of the city of Antwerp exactly as illustrated in:

Pieter Génard, Armorial des institutions communales d´Anvers.



So now we know. The painting once belonged to the community and was sealed as such, probably following a bankrupcy or death of an owner without issue. It would then be sold at a local auction house, which is still very much the custom today.

Arb, you have been of such immense help on this, I cannot thank you enough.



Are there any ways to date the seal in question?



Judging from your explanation, it seems very possible (even likely) that the painting may predate the application of the seal. I would be very curious to know if the seal itself can be dated?



(the painting is still waiting in customs [:(] )

quote:

---

Originally posted by LSMorgan


Arb, you have been of such immense help on this, I cannot thank you enough.



Are there any ways to date the seal in question?



Judging from your explanation, it seems very possible (even likely) that the painting may predate the application of the seal. I would be very curious to know if the seal itself can be dated?



(the painting is still waiting in customs [:(] )

---

I can confirm, as an inhabitant of the city of Antwerp, that above is correct.



Collector :-)

quote:

---

Originally posted by arb


The topic monitor Ms.Marinus informs us on the site that it is indeed the seal of the city of Antwerp exactly as illustrated in:

Pieter Génard, Armorial des institutions communales d´Anvers.



So now we know. The painting once belonged to the community and was sealed as such, probably following a bankrupcy or death of an owner without issue. It would then be sold at a local auction house, which is still very much the custom today.

---

Can the image from the book be found and posted? Perhaps there is an Anverian or Antwerpian with access to the illustration.

are the guys in the paintings supposed to be dwarves? has a very folky, arts and crafts feel to it with their little hands and big heads and static composition. not necessarily bad. but definetly not rembrandt.

:)

quote:

---

Originally posted by slokems


are the guys in the paintings supposed to be dwarves? has a very folky, arts and crafts feel to it with their little hands and big heads and static composition. not necessarily bad. but definetly not rembrandt.

:)

---

It isn´t intended to be a realist composition (obviously)



FYI, it quite likely predates the arts and crafts movement by about two or three hundred years, maybe more.

I would be happy to offer any advice on the painting - I really didn´t want to ´pull it apart´ because in a way I actually like it. I mean it has a certain charm.



Yes, you´re right, I can´t tell 100% for certain that the back has been stained, but i´m pretty certain. What throws alarm bells in my head is the evenness and brown-ness of the colouration - especially when looking at the third photograph. You can see that the tape or material that is adhering the canvas to the frame has the same even colouration. In my opinion this is not a natural ageing. I would like to see a close up of the area in the top right hand corner verso once you´ve received the painting (the lighter patch top left in the 3rd photo). This area is lighter because of where the canvas would have been folded over the stretcher, however it looks odd that the tape is also lighter at that spot.



The painting itself appears to be a pastiche taking elements from Bruegel, Ostade, Brewer etc. But the style and handling of the paint is not typical of anything originating from those periods. The instrument the chap is playing is a Hurdy Gurdy and these strolling musicians frequently appear in Netherlandish painting. The instrument itself is a relatively accurate rendition of an 18th century Hurdy Gurdy, however these instruments are still built in that style today and have little changed in appearance.



I didn´t post because I wanted to spoil your fun of acquiring a painting that you like - I am also not a member of a local antiques club, and if one day i´m tempted to join one, I would reconsider the purpose of breathing. I don´t enjoy telling people their painting isn´t what it purports to be - I actually get a sinking guilty feeling and wish I had never said anything in the first place, however I did choose this career and it´s not always bad news.



While jillh was correct on a couple of points he/she was wrong about the frame. It´s definitely 18th or 19th century - you see the corner? The way it has been joined with the diagonal wedge is a technique used in this period. It´s hard to see, but if the wedge goes from a small point to a fatter point it is almost certainly French - if it´s a rectangular wedge then it could be Netherlandish/English. The frame is probably worth what you paid for the painting - if it is Oak (which it appears to be although hard to tell from the photo). These Northern European old Oak frames are difficult to find.

Hmmm... Interesting.

When I get it, would you be willing to take a look at it?

I can send it over with funds for return postage.



I really don´t know how you can say with any certainty that it was ´´stained´´ just by looking at a (somewhat bad) picture. Really, you can´t with any certainty. Furthermore, the fact that it is on flat canvas and not applied to a stretcher isn´t that odd for older European folk art- at all. The application of the seal was already clearly and plausibly explained above. Where do you expect such a seal to be placed. On the image of the painting itself?



Since it is in customs, I can´t subject it to any sort of scientific procedures to verify much at present, but I would imagine it should be out soon and when it is, I can certainly verify whether there have been any auxillary application of stains or false aging processes undertaken. There won´t be much difficulty in establishing that, conclusively, without any debate. If there are such indicators, then there won´t be any doubt.



Can´t wait to get this one under the stereo microscope!



As an aside, I also a very, very avid collector of antiquities from early human history.

Now *that* is a field where fakes are the rule, rather than the ´´exception´´- as is the case in the art field.

As such, reckless naysaying by certain ´´experts´´ has become terribly common- irresponsibly so. I recently purchased an alabaster mortar from ancient Egypt from a renowned Chicago antiquities seller. Rock solid history, impeccable chain of custody, unquestionably authentic.

Just for fun, I brought it to my local antiques club and told the ´´experts´´ that I purchased it on ebay. For fifteen minutes I received speeches and insistences that it was just the worst fake they had ever seen for X, Y and Z reasons. When I told them the whole ´´ebay thing´´ was a joke, showed the receipt from where I purchased which also showed how much I paid, they all grew silent.

Right now, I think it´s a toss up (particularly given your assesment and your obvious qualification)



There is a chance it may not be authentic (such is the chance we all take when we buy things from far away places without examining them first) but there really aren´t any rock solid indicators to suggest inauthenticity. There might be components that raise questions, but questions can be answered.



Like I said. I will most definitely be subjecting this one to microscopy and quite possible, a chemical test or two. I will post digital images of ´´what lies beneath´´ as soon as I have the actual painting to work with.



I cannot wait to get this one in!!

Do you use a customs broker to facilitate your entries? I have found that most customs inspectors prefer it. That way someone else does all their work for them and they can just stamp it cleared.

The inspector only has to inspect the paperwork done by the broker, verifying that it has been done correctly and not have to bother with examining the actual item that may be more difficult to verify.

or...

Maybe they are waiting for this forum to pass final judgment on the artwork before they release it



Are you familiar with this Florida company?They might give you a free consultation and are a bit closer to home.



http://www.artexpertswebsite.com/pages/contact.html 

I´m really sorry to tell you this but in my opinion that painting is not very old and has been made to look old. Firstly, it´s odd the canvas isn´t stretchered. Secondly the canvas has been stained to make it look old. Thirdly the seal is over the tape which is very odd. Is that paper tape or some kind fabric? Whatever it is it also has been stained to age. Lastly, the style of the painting is not right. I really hope you didn´t spend a lot on it and I am sorry to give you bad news. What is good though is the frame - the frame looks to be 18th century Oak and most probably originated in France.



Timothy Lawrence Williams MA (Hons)

Neil MacGregor Scholar

The National Gallery,

London

Nothing wrong with the authenticity. It is 18th century, possibly even 17th. But is it art?

Maybe in the U.S. of A it is. But in Europe we call it folklore.

Great to see some knowledgeable people on the forum. Dear LS Morgan, why don´t you stop being such a bore and pedantic drudge and realize this is not what you think it is? Take PT Barnum´s advice and realize there´s a sucker born every minute.



Good information on the seal. I have never seen a seal used to ´´age´´ a piece. But I´ll be on the lookout. I also learned something about the frame. Thanks to folks who are really knowledgeable. Seems there are some people who really know this area. This forum should not be used to berate others, are you listening LS Moron? It should be used to exchange knowledge.



I think folklore is a nice euphemism. I tell my clients when they have a piece like this, that piece is not worth appraising, let´s see what other treasures you may have.



I´ve seen some great European, folky pieces but fortunately none like this.

Seeing as art is whatever one says it is, yes. This is art.

quote:

---

Originally posted by jillh2001


This forum should not be used to berate others, are you listening LS Moron?

---

So in addition to being stupid, you´re a hypocrite too. [B)]



Nothing has been established yet, but we will as soon as it arrives.

Your assesments have been pathetically bad- like, laughably so (including in this very thread- i.e- the frame) and you have yet to cite a single bona-fide that might cause someone to listen to you, so why don´t you go back to your strip mall and continue on with your appraisals of Louis Icart and Bev Doolittle prints.



You were one of the original degenerates who slummed around this forum begging for people to send you money for a ´´certified appraisal´´. You are obviously terribly unqualified, but even worse, you´re possibly a scammer to boot.



We were all much better off when you weren´t posting here, and I think you were better off when you weren´t posting here as well. At least, you were spared the humiliation of spouting off horrendously incorrect assesments and being called down about them.



PS- Have you decided to tell us what your qualifications are? TL certainlly has. In addition to having qualifications to cite, his information is obviously rooted in a base of knowlege that is far more than your own (which border on being a running joke around these forums)

quote:

---

I think folklore is a nice euphemism.

---

Glad you like it. You will note it comes from someone who doesn´t really question the age of the piece.



I don´t even know why I bother replying to you. It´s like trying to reason with a retarded child.

quote:

---

Originally posted by bodo


Maybe in the U.S. of A it is. But in Europe we call it folklore.

---

Nah. I´ll delete that. I´ve been helped by some wonderful people on this forum who happen to come from Europe and I don´t want to make a blanket statement that might offend good people whom I really don´t intend to offend.



I will say this. With certain exceptions, the Germanic sensibility about the arts ´is what it is.´

Of course you agree that the value of art does not depend on age, Chinaman. You sell brand new old masters like fortune cookies.

Yes, i quite agree with you that the value of the fine art does not just refer to the age.There are lots of factors.The most important factor i think it is the connotation of painting tried to represent.:)



I am new to here.:).

quote:

---

Originally posted by jillh2001


Can you please post the upper left ( just the three faces) in greater detail also the pitcher on the table ( a detail). I´m looking for the manner of painting in the faces and the type of porcelain on the table ( Kangi other?) Most likely the porcelain is going to tell you roughly when the piece was painted. What about that musical instrument? Is it a mandolin? guitar? other? You can also tell from the instrument what century this is likely to be.

What I would start with are the figures, they don´t look right to me for the date you are seeking. It´s a rural painting ( that is most likely was done not in or near an urban center-where schools of art and artists would have shared manners and techniques like perspective, color, anatomy etc. I would say it is an untrained/ not formally trained artist. ( like our American folk art). The seal does look pretty good. You can find the motif for the center of the seal with research. Also the frame, can be easily changed but it a good beginning point and part of the overall history of the piece. I would definitely try to check the subjects manner of dress and go from there.

Just because the gallery/vendor you bought it from is reputable doe/does not mean it is what they say it is. I had a clients painting the other day. They purchased it as an oil on board and its an oil on canvas on board and effects the value to a LARGE degree. The gallery is honest, according to the person at Christies I spoke to ´´they are very reputable´´ They just made a mistake.

How does the back of this piece fit into the frame? What type of nails or adhesive do you have? Is the adhesive rabbit glue or something else. This will also give you info.

Hope you didn´t pay too much because the value is usually in the piece not the age. Still it is quaint.

---

[:(]damned time lag!

Thank you saintluc for bumping this!



I´ve just reread it all a year later and it made me smile, again, the second time around :-)



The question is - What was the conclusion, please, LS Morgan, on this painting when you finally got it out of customs? I am dying to know!

LS Morgan hasn´t unfortunatly been on the board for a while, but if I remember correctly there was an issue with the shipping, the picture was returned and LS was refunded.

Thank you, TLW.



What a shame! We shall never know....

Man, I have never seen so many accusations and insults fly on this forum! How terrible.

The package was ´´held´´ in customs for a very long time... As a result, this caused a riff between me and the seller- for reasons that in hindsight were understandable. She was out her goods, I was out money and the only people who knew anything were the people who were sitting on their butts at customs.



It arrived, but I had already been processed a refund for it, so back it went... Kind of a shame, but it was more of a headache than it was worth.

If you still have the photos of the work LSMorgan please repost them so that every on will know what all the fuss is about , jillh2001 can be clicked her pseudonym and read all of her topics.



The other interesting battle has unfortunately been deleted or maybe not, the other pseudonic with sardonic wit was nomadic