We are an eBay affiliate and may be compensated for clicks on links that result in purchases.
Authenticity is Everything
Opinions on this Abraham Lincoln signed card
Opinions on this Abraham Lincoln signed card. The seller is country_cat777 and I think it should be custom (seller listed) when we post that way people can go back and look at these sellers. Also look at the George Washington and Lincoln silk ribbons. This can't be real
Provenance: Orrill's Auction and from a Private Sylmar, California Estate.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/354082073578?hash=item5270efabea:g:p3YAAOS...
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Ty Ridenour on
-
I would go fake becuase he liked to slant his L and I and the N on the end is usually not so definied
-
Permalink Reply by Eddy on
-
Definitely not real IMO. Sad thing is there are currently 54 "watchers" on this.
-
-
How can ebay just allow this though. Seriously someone is going to get ripped off for like 10-15K who just wants to own a piece of history. There is some good advise on this site. Stick to good sellers and if you do venture into e-bay, only mess around with stuff that has been autheticated. There might be some diamonds in the rough, but to get there is just way to much s*** to go through.
-
-
I'm not sure that eBay is allowing to go through. Their robots don't catch things unless someone makes a complaint. There's no requirement for a cert. or letter from a TPA (although that's always an option when you are creating a listing.
I agree, it's like the Wild West on eBay!
-
-
I remember the auction. The seller actually stated that it was most likely done by someone from the opposing (Democrats) party, since the business card obviously was propaganda against the Lincoln's party- the National Union Party, which was the temporary name of the Republicans.
Yes, there is a very distinct possibility that Lincoln may have signed it. It is well documented that Lincoln had a good sense of humor and like anyone else... his signature isn't going to be exactly the same every time! In fact, after examining signatures for 40 years, I would be very suspicious if it was exactly the same as pictured in any of the signature guides. You should look at your signature 10 years ago, or even 5 years or 1 year ago... does every single letter look exactly the same? No, it does not. Signature guides are meant to be exactly what they imply- "guides" and should not be taken for anything more than being "guides".
Therefore, the seller did an impressive job of honestly and accurately describing the item. Yet, Etienne made some pretty strong accusations that are clearly based on not reading the seller's description and his lack of knowledge pertaining to signatures.
-
-
The original poster asked for opinions on the signature and Etienne and others responded. There is no pretense or expectation that anyone researched the history of the item prior to giving an opinion.
You seem to set the bar pretty low for authentication by simply saying that signatures change over time. Of course they can change/evolve, and someone who studies a particular autograph will strive to recognize the various styles.
-
-
I appreciate you sharing your view! Based on some of the opinions, I understand that no one researched the history or bothered to see what the seller wrote before passing judgement.
As with any item, it is important to research its' history, also known as provenance, before giving an opinion. Experienced collectors are aware of this and many reputable auction houses, such as Christie's, Sotheby's and Bonhams will not take autographed items without verifiable provenance. Most good sellers are happy to provide provenance. However, there are some instances in which a seller may not be able to provide provenance because the owner or estate wants anonymity. Even reputable auction houses like the ones mentioned above will often write these items come from "private collections".
If you would like more of a technical opinion about this signature, I am happy to provide it. I see the same consistency and fluidity in this signature that I see in some of Lincoln's other documented signatures.
If I recall, I believe the seller also provided provenance and a view of the signature under an ultraviolet light. In my opinion, every seller should provide an ultraviolet light view of a potentially valuable old autograph. As you probably know, 19th century ink fluoresces much differently under an ultraviolet light than 20th century ink. Early 20th century ink also fluoresces differently than late 20th century ink. Based on what I saw in the digital image of the ink under an ultraviolet light, it was clearly a 19th century signature and it was comprised of brown india ink, which was a medium Lincoln was known to use.
I also agree that there are some minor variations in the signature, which I would fully expect when viewing a signature that could possibly be authentic. Are the variations so different that I could state that he didn't sign it... absolutely not.
I appreciate you offering this website and can see that you are very passionate about educating people about autographs, as I have been for 40 years. Yes, there are bad sellers and bad auction houses that knowingly misrepresent autographs. My concern is when unknowledgeable people try to falsely accuse honest sellers of selling items that "can't be real" or by writing that someone is going to be "ripped off", when some sellers, like this one, have properly represented their items.
-
-
I forgot to mention that the Democratic made business card is datable to the 1860's, which was during Lincoln's lifetime. It may be more valuable than Lincoln's autograph, since I believe there is only one other example of it which is in the Library of Congress.
-
-
I can't speak for others. However, as one of the original responders to this thread, you will see that I stated very clearly "IMO".
An opinion is what it is. In this case, opinions were being actively sought in the OP.
-
-
Its not a question of whether or not he might have signed it. In authenticating autographs I think of there being three categories: definitely real, definitely fake, and undetermined authenticity. For me, only "definitely real" passes the test. To preseve the integrity of those, questionable autographs should be rejected. That's how I was taught years ago and I subscribe to that approach.
By your own assessment the card dates from the 1860s, so the signature should match others from that era. Most who have responded do not believe that it does.
-
-
If truth be told, those cards (with a cool aged look) have been replicated countless times over. I purchased one myself about 10 years ago from a souvenir shop in Springfield, IL during a visit of the Lincoln sites.
I think this kind of thing is important to keep in mind with this type of material.
Blog Posts
Ebay Seller Smpsportscards Sells Forged Counterfeit Willie Mays 1996-97 Topps Autograph Card
Posted by CJCollector on November 11, 2024 at 6:03pm 0 Comments 1 Like
COA CSA Authentic Forged Babe Ruth Cut Autograph Laughable
Posted by CJCollector on November 9, 2024 at 2:32pm 7 Comments 0 Likes
Ebay Seller Tsuch67 Sells Forged Mickey Mantle Duke Snider Willie Mays Baseball
Posted by CJCollector on October 30, 2024 at 3:13pm 2 Comments 0 Likes
Photos
© 2024 Created by Steve Cyrkin, Admin.
Powered by
Badges | Report an Issue | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service
