The 'art' in collecting

Anthony Richter Collection Founder

Museums, galleries, private collectors and even corporations are faced with a similar dilemma. Vermeer's painting of 'Girl with a Pearl Earring' is offered and bought. It is later found to the horror of all (but the forger) that the Vermeer purchased for an obscene amount is actually a Meegeren's and would be more accurately described as 'Mistress' with a Pearl Earring ... a very famous fake.

Buyers with even modest budgets face the same challenge. Nobody has an interest in buying a fake. Where facsimiles, replicas and reproductions are very important to museums and collectors ... fakes are harmful to finance and almost always to reputations no matter how well intentioned the purchase.

In the many years of acquiring specific artifacts Anthony Richter confronted the problem with 'heavyweight' help. He knew that a love of ancient artifacts had little to do with knowing anything about buying an authentic artifact versus even a low quality fake. To make a 'safer' acquisition he did what he had done in his corporate life - he sought the expertise of the most experienced global specialists available.

Richter recalls how on a visit to a conservation laboratory [In the British Museum] the conservator astonished him by identifying a hitherto mysterious unidentified bronze object in Richter's Civilization Collection as being an artifact of the Etruscan civilization.

We are promised the world ... then eventually given an atlas.

Past Patron of The British Museum 'Reader' of The British Museum Library Associate of The British Museum 'Visitor' to the museum Conservatory Laboratories, Conservation Labs. and Restoration Workshops

In 1990 the British museum published the book 'FAKE' edited by Mark Jones. The book describes world histories of spectacular fakes, 400 of which were in the museums own collection. Quite apart from a continuing enjoyment of the book it became a useful reference Richter used for the 30 years since its publication. He is aware of the faker's tireless drive for financial gain without "the least awareness of the dilution of the only available truth of the past". He has also said "The Civilization Collection has held an advantage over the many 'collectors' of antiquity in that cost came a poor second to truth”. Research for the reality of anything for his collection traced only truth: “If it wasn't true it was a paperweight."

He recalls a case from “Fake” where museums, galleries, private collectors and even corporations are faced with a similar dilemma. Vermeer's painting of 'Girl with a Pearl Earring' is offered and bought. It is later found to the horror of all (but the forger) that the Vermeer purchased for an obscene amount is actually a Meegeren's and would be more accurately described as 'Mistress' with a Pearl Earring ... a famous fake.

Buyers with even the most modest budgets face just as big a challenge. Nobody has an interest in buying a fake. Where facsimiles, replicas and reproductions are important to museums and coll- ectors ... fakes are harmful to finance and almost always to reputations no matter how well inten- tioned the purchase.

In the years of acquiring specific artifacts Anthony Richter confronted the problem with 'heavy- weight' help. He knew a love of ancient treasures had little to do with buying an authentic artifact versus even a low quality fake. To make a 'safer' acquisiton he sought the expertise of the most experienced global specialists. Richter tells of a visit to a conservation laboratory [In the British Museum]: The conservator identified a hitherto mysterious, unidentified small bronze object in Richter's collection as being an artifact of the Etruscan civilization.

Though making no secret of his disdain for the time-worn 'Provenance' process i.e. establishing the authenticity of an art object, manuscripts, books or paintings, Richter expressed the view that: "The Provenance process is a time honoured self-deluding process of proving authenticity through fallible memories and acceptance of false documents". Despite this he has an unending attachment to the provenance that analysis-science brings to establishing the likely truth of a thing. To stay ahead of detection of their hard work, forgers, fakers and counterfeiters must do a catch-up on testing-methods, obliging science to once again discover even more sophisticated ways of detecting the fake.

Since artifacts of interest were to be found worldwide the most had to be made of visits to a country where they were on offer. Though good relationships with gallery or auction houses could be helpful in competing for a targeted purchase, time was the real enemy. It was not uncommon that along with the sought after artifact, additional pieces of the same-origin and of similar type would magically appear from a gallery's 'reserve' as a gesture of respect or friendship for a familiar and well thought of buyer.

Given that kind of regard, on no account should the dealer, gallery, or owner be kept waiting through excessively long decision making delays. Significant time lags could pressure the seller when interest from new competitive collectors had emerged for the same artifact. Since authenticity of a piece was of paramount importance, irrespective of how highly regarded the seller, examination, consultations and research would be completed irrespective of the chance of 'missing out'.

Known to appear eccentric on occasions, Anthony Richter approached the onerous task of coming to understand what something is, in the way he might approach an invention: He began at “The first principle” with the most complete physical description of “what a thing purports to be. It was a beginning point but largely ignored from then on. In turn even the most banal assumptions would be examined along with as many of the object’s physical characteristics as can be seen or ‘uncovered’. For this Richter chose to draw in detail every object he considered for purchase. Some of the results of those first sketches are shown below.

In Richter words: “Needless to say a choice to ‘publicly’ sketch artifacts of interest drew mumblings of disbelief but never rejection by dealers or galleries. This unusual way of beginning the appraisal and authentication of an item was greeted with some intrigue but never disrespect. It is at the very first moment of seeing the artifacts in three dimensions I soon produced a cluttering of pencils, pens, watercolor pencils and numerous pads of art paper. The very first occasion this odd spectacle was on display was in 1998 in the offices of the Moongate gallery owner in Singapore.

It was logical that overly fast, decisive decision-making always allowed ample time for regret - if you got it wrong. The sketches would be accompanied by brief scribbled notes (see below) of principal importance or even personal knowledge not to found ‘on the books’ as provided by gallery, dealer or owner.

A case of ‘knowledge not on the books’ arose in my plan to buy at auction President John F Kennedy’s much seen and famous armchair often used by him - apparently to ease his chronic back condition. The auction was being handled by Sothebys to whom I had expressed my interest and a week prior to the auction visited their rooms to tie-up paperwork. The manager whom I hadn’t know well seemed to hover about me as I walked through the auction room. He eventually asked me about my interest in Kennedy’s ‘rocking chair’. It took very little time for him to ask me ‘which particular rocking chair I was most interested in’. Answering my motionless look of bewilderment he informed me that the Kennedy family owned at least five identical chairs and the gallery had so far been unable to establish which of those he had actually sat on. The modest estimate put on President Kennedy’s rocking chair by Sothebys was US$5000: The rocking chair realized more than US$120,000. Clearly the buyer needed more information. There were probably many more other auctions, more chairs and happy buyers.

Those responsible for museum acquisitions, gallery owners and private collectors are aware there are times when an offering comes up short of first descriptions. The on-site sketching provided for me a means of seeing in close up, fine detail, flaws, breaks, textures and even anatomical aspects that affirmed a piece's probable authenticity or had it consigned to the weaselly 'wrong' basket.

Often, years after being little more than rapidly executed line-drawings, I took immense pleasure in converting the 'hasty-scribbles' into an image much closer to reality: I did this using the artifact that had been sketched and later acquired to create the water-colour paintings. (examples below). 40 years on and I still get pleasure in producing similar paintings. Lower on this page is a water-color of an Egyptian 'Broadcollar': In a moment of idle inattention I decided I would attempt to capture, with as much accuracy as I was able, the Egyptian bejewelled broadcollar made up of over one thousand four hundred individual pieces. For the perverse perfectionist readers I have included the detailing-sheet I used to keep track of each tiny painful piece!

It took years to notice many of those vital in-situ sketches were dashed out on hotel stationary !

The process ...

Primitive and globular incised pottery. Baked clay patterned imprint rollers. 3000 -1600 bce BAN CHIANG Thailand

MAN'S first BRONZE, Top L: Clay mold for bronze Dibble Head [Mid. R:] Globular incised bronze bell (ankle or wrist 'bangle') . Detachable globular bronze bell with intact bronze 'ringing' pellet. Center T. Wrist torque bronze. Human femur with trocus-shell bangles in soil matrix.

MAN'S first BRONZE, Ban Chiang Thailand. Spearhead. 'Dibble Stick'. Torque (Torc). Axe head. Ground-cast bronze ingot.

Broadcollar: neck jewellery. Gold and drilled Lapis beading. (Restrung).

These two rapid sketches are examples of the authentication process first days. Though far from the extremely and necessarily expensive time-consuming process of having artifacts tested by laboratories as are run by Oxford university et al. the sketching method has proved effective: i.e. within a range of objective expert judgements.

Should an extremely important artifact come to hand any number of specialists were always happy to help in satisfying its authenticity. Despite this, does the collection have fakes?

Fortunately no artifact has ever been found to be a copy - good or bad but to this is the question put and answered by the art world: If the fake is as beautiful and as skillfully executed as the original ... is there a problem?

This exquisitely sculpted bust (left) is by most specialists in the field considered a masterpiece - though it is a forgery of the bust of Lucrezia Donati.

It became so highly prized it was eventually purchased by the British Albert & Victoria museum at a price equal to that of the original. [V&A 38 - 1869]