We're an eBay affiliate and may be compensated on purchases made through clicks.

Charlton Heston Secretarial Signature Study

Hi:

At Steve Cyrkin's invitation, I'd like to call your attention to a signature study I've posted on my blog, Charlton Heston signature study by Steve Zarelli.

I believe I have identified the "tell" in Charlton Heston secretarial signatures, and if I am correct, the news is not good for most collectors. It appears that most Heston signed photos are secretarially signed.

Here is a synopsis:

The Theory
Photographs and other memorabilia sent to Mr. Heston's office were signed by a secretary. However, Mr. Heston did authentically sign books through-the-mail.

Real vs. Secretary
In authentic signatures, the R in "Charlton" is distinctly a lowercase "r" and less than half the height of the L. The first four letters are clearly "Char."

In secretarial signatures, the R looks much more like a lowercase "l" and is about the same height as the L. So, the first four letters appear to be "Chall."

I have attached two images to give you a small sampling.

For more details and images, please visit my blog at the link below.

I'd love to hear your feedback and thoughts on this. I fully anticipate some resistance to the theory, because denial is always the first step. In fact, I would love to be proved wrong, because that would mean I wasn't sitting on a bunch of secretary signed photos!

By way of introduction, I have been collecting since the early 90s and I am the UACC Ethics Director.

I look forward to the discussion.

The Collecting Obsession

Regards,

Steve Zarelli

Tags: Charlton, Forgery, Heston, Secretary, authenticating, autograph, secretarial

2 members like this

Attachments: No photo uploads here

Figure 1.jpg, 60 KB
Secretary 1.jpg, 37 KB

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Bob Shinn on March 12, 2011 at 9:05am

Hello.....

PSA/DNA anybody out there???????

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on March 12, 2011 at 9:50am

I emailed Joe Orlando late yesterday afternoon. They are looking into it.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on March 12, 2011 at 10:40am

String 'em up...it'll teach 'em a lesson.

This is no way to build productive discussion on issues in the autograph community.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by DB on March 12, 2011 at 11:10am

Does anyone have any idea how many Hestons are actually submitted to PSA/DNA --vs- Mantles, Dimaggios and so on?

Some are not necessarily going to do back-flips but I am sure when a few of them get back from their travels this coming week we ought to hear something.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on March 12, 2011 at 12:26pm

This is not a race. Give sellers and authenticators a month to digest and address this. That's only reasonable.

If I was an authenticator or seller, I'd stop authenticating or selling these likely secretarials immediately, but do my own due diligence before calling them secretarials. I'd contact my submitters, consignors or suppliers of a number of Hestons over time for their input and evidence to confirm the studies, even if it looks obvious.

We're clamoring for a safer and more orderly autograph industry. That will only happen by the legitimate hobby working together, not attacking each other at every opportunity.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Bob Shinn on March 12, 2011 at 3:19pm

Steve......

The evidence is extremely clear.

It speaks so loud its hurting my ears.

Authenticators did not due their due diligence in regards to the Heston Exemplars.

Sellers, submitters, consignors and supplier's did not due their due diligence either.

Why do you keep questioning the validity of the studies, they are right on....

You need look no further than the Groebel article about Heston in your own Magazine

and check those authentic examples of Mr. Hestons signature against the 8x10 color photo

signature.

If that doesn't do it for you, I don't know what will..........

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on March 12, 2011 at 3:35pm

I don't question the studies, I think they're right on. But others still have to look at them, do their own due diligence and decide what to do. Most important is giving them time. Thirty days isn't an unreasonable amount of time, as long as they're not selling or authenticating these items in the meantime.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by DB on March 12, 2011 at 11:15pm

that's the problem - some are and many are still selling them especially the ones that monitor these blogs (even though they will claim they dont) IMHO that is. then we will have the B & D list sellers who will sell them no matter what - that should be the next list of places posted.

but at least we know of 3 that have embraced and stop moving them.

for those of us who have been involved and now know enough to be dangerous - just take a stroll through ebay. It is simply fascinating.