We are an eBay affiliate and may be compensated for clicks on links that result in purchases.

Charlton Heston - secretarials, variations & authentics (post 'em here)

This is the place for the discussion as to the follow-up for the secretarial study thread.

That thread; proposed;

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."

and it seems to have merit. However, in looking at hundreds of Hestons of late there are many that fall into the above theory and yet quite a few variations that aren't so clean. There are no sacred cows in this thread but do keep it civil.

Bear in mind as you cascade thru the many examples below there are clearly some that fall into this, some that don't and an interesting variation.

Some commentors have been quick to point out that dealers and sellers of these items may have fallen into following a "bogus" exemplar. I will post Jan Schray's exemplars and the "secretarial" one touted here will be found in her 1997 exemplar book. Thus, without a date on COAs it's hard to tell when something was sold.

Cyrkin in the other thread opted to close it with a number of justifications; ... indisputable work. It's at risk of being adulterated by Hestons being presented as either genuine, out and out forgeries, or variations of known secretarials without the painstaking, focused research and consensus-building that made this study so valuable in the first place. That's beyond the scope of this discussion and is putting the study's clarity and integrity at risk.

I for one could not disagree with this rationale moreso. It is thru the posting of perceived hestons that either lends support, refutes or enhances the theory. I noticed the updates to the original blog include; I will note that, out a hundreds of exemplars, I found a handful of books that did not have a distinct "r" formation. My theory is these books may have been through-the-mail exemplars signed by a secretary. The reason for this could be that Mr. Heston's schedule did not allow for signing at that time or, once his illness took hold, secretaries began signing books through the mail as well as photos.

I've also noted this in same discussion with Zipper and there was a suspicion that other forgeries were apparent. it is the continued flow of questionable non-authentic items that gives strength to any theory. I'll attempt to capture the many examples before they are arbitrarily removed.

6/13/12 - Rules of the Thread;

R1 - stay on subject (don't care for moderated blogs but since owners of threads have little recourse to have comments removed at their discretion).

R2 - if you are going to post a link than at a MINIMUM post the picture of the item. The secretarial study thread has a number of links to non-existent photos. Esp Ebay ones as they have been removed by EBAY or no longer visible. If you don't know how then after you post the comment pm me and I'll capture the picture for posterity.

2 members like this

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Steve Viola on February 27, 2013 at 2:39pm

How does this book look to everyone?

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Brick Hunter on February 27, 2013 at 8:56pm

Perfectly fine authentic item, Steve.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Mike Sibley on February 28, 2013 at 12:11am

Steve, no problem with this one - 100% authentic.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by JXE on March 11, 2013 at 8:33am

I bought the other photo from the same seller and I thought I'd post it up here for opinions so I could be positive. It looks good to me, but I NEVER studied Heston seriously. I can spot the secretarials, though, and this doesn't look like them. Judging by the proof photo, he signed hundreds of these at that event.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Zarelli on March 11, 2013 at 8:35am

Good IMO

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rick Meyer on February 28, 2013 at 5:58pm

I bought one. Just got notice from EBAY that they took down the auction and that I'm not obligated to pay. Odd....never seen that before.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Zarelli on February 28, 2013 at 6:03pm

WTF? Those SPs are 100% good.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rick Meyer on February 28, 2013 at 6:22pm

I thought so to. I am bummed. I messaged him anyway to see if I can buy it outside EBAY. He has another auction with Heston that is still up but I liked the Moses pic better.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Zarelli on February 28, 2013 at 6:50pm

I bought one of each some time ago. No doubt good.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Brick Hunter on March 1, 2013 at 2:36am

Disappointing but not surprising. The site's decision-making process concerning autographs is fairly abysmal in my opinion. It really says something that Global Authentics is on their list of recommended authenticators. Not one person on their staff has enough knowledge to flag that, unless it's just apathy. I don't know which is worse. Anyway, authentic items shouldn't be attacked when they allow a cesspool of forgeries.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Viola on March 11, 2013 at 8:41am

Wow this is interesting. Going through my stuff I found the April 1997 issue of Autograph Collecting magazine which featured Heston on its cover and the article Charlton Heston on autographs. One of the standard questions is always do you sign autographs through the mail. He answers > Yes as long as a SASE is sent. What's up with that? He lied?

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Zarelli on March 11, 2013 at 8:47am

Yes and no. He did sign autographs through the mail. Just not all of them.

You may recall he answered another questionnaire obtained by Rolf Ramheiser that he "had help with his mail" and he authorized some people to sign for him.