My wife and I reviewed the evidence and we both concurred that the two "5"s are NOT identical, the lower one being true while the Anno: "5" appears as a "6" that was changed to look like a "5". The suspect lies in the slight tail of the Anno:"5"'s upper stroke, which corresponds with the natural 'loop' of the "6". If you turn the image upside down they look like identical "6"s with one having a(n) (intentional) gap and the other not.
1
Better late than never.
I'm surprised no one (including, apparently, various experts looking at the owner's claim) haven't picked up on the little word 'Den' in front of the date under the sculpture's foot. It is unmistakably Swedish, It means 'the', and the whole date 'Anno 1687 den 23 November' is a perfect example of written Swedish from that period (be it 1597 or 1697). Likewise, 'Me fecit Gerhadt Meier Holmiae' would be natural for a craftsman in Sweden during this period. The name Gerhard Meier is clearly Germanic, but many skilled craftsmen were imported from Germany and other parts of Europe during the hundred years in question. Why is there even a debate about the provenance of this piece?
Such an uninformed, unscholarly article: This kind of presentation which really translates into a question of the market value of the piece is the fallout from the corrupting t.v. presentation Antiques Road Show which reduces or lifts all according to what something MIGHT fetch at auction if you're lucky, or at retail which is meaningless. The gullible public is addicted to the formula, and is kept in awe of the value of baseballs and blankets. "For insurance purposes, this statue should be valued at at least ......." Other than that, the statue itself is presented in such a bad photograph there is no way to even enjoy or evaluate or SEE it. The foot itself certainly does not suggest the work of a giant like Gianbologna. Why was Graham Bowley given such an assignment, or why was it even printed at all? Does he perhaps collect baseballs?
It's a 5.
At first I thought it was a 6, until comparing it with the 5 underneath. They share the same characteristics.
It's clearly by Georges de la Tour.
A lot is wrong with the art world.... gazillions spent on x,y,z often without a penny in tax being collected. Bring back the luxury tax... and stop putting extra taxes on gasoline and plane tickets because the govmt is running out of $$.
The 6 is a 6.... and that it is obscure probably amused someone...
2
There is a lot of money to be made by declaring the number to be a five. So that is what a lot of "experts" will choose.
It is amazing to me how they can ignore the Swede's name on the sculpture. But the lure of money can be so bright it can selectively blind you.
1
I am the founder of and a curator for a small non profit arts group in Newark, NJ. I find the high end of the art market has more to do with tax evaision and snobbery than with the quality of art. I can afford to be critical of the influence of money as the primary gauge of "value" in the art market because, I run a non profit.
last year, my (our) tiny group was responsible for 29 projects showing the work of more than 40 local and regional artists. Almost all of the shows were held in long vacant storefronts near downtown. Total sales were around $7,000 80% to 90% of which went to the artists. Over the past 5 years, Artfrontgalleries.com has been responsible for getting permanent, viable tenants for 6 long vacant spaces on a commercial corridor. This is the value of art
11
@Timothy P. Dingman, you're so right. Thank you for bringing it up.
3
@Timothy P. Dingman
You know Tim, I once heard an academic introduce to Philip Pearlstein another artist as her being a "regional" artist. I can tell you I was floored by the poorly-conceived comment and I would say the same for yours.
Interesting commentary. I am surprised that people did not complain that the anatomic quality, such as the "poorly defined and way too tubular" arms, did not imply a relatively poor later copy.
6