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

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 Herman Darvick on August 3, 2011 at 6:45pm

I removed them. Completely my mistake.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Lou reves on August 3, 2011 at 6:49pm

Good job Herman

Nuff said

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Lou reves on August 5, 2011 at 11:13pm

thought you all may get a kick out of this!

http://shop.ebay.com/elfies6/m.html?_nkw=heston&_sacat=0&_o...

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by CJCollector on August 10, 2011 at 6:28pm

Here is a Nate Sanders "Chall" Heston.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by DB on August 10, 2011 at 6:44pm

and for a mere $1000.00 you too can own this piece! Maybe we should offer a $1.00

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Brick Hunter on August 23, 2011 at 4:23pm

Here's a Charlton Heston "small r" forgery. A horrible one at that offered for sale on eBay. The forgers are out there but I still don't see it very often. The "Chall" secretarials still make up the vast majority.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/CHARLTON-HESTON-SIGNED-VINTAGE-8X10-PHOTO-B...

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Zarelli on August 23, 2011 at 5:37pm

Same seller has a pretty suspect Jimmy Stewart:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/JAMES-STEWART-SIGNED-VINTAGE-8X10-PHOTO-HAR...

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Brick Hunter on August 23, 2011 at 6:30pm

You can call it what it is. This stuff is really bad.

What do you think of this one, Zipper? Scroll down to see the reverse of the card is a Harvey drawing. It's a peculiar item. I'd normally think it's a forgery right away but the signatures are actually close to some of his later signatures in my opinion. What do you think?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Card-signed-Jimmy-Stewart-/350486529459?pt=...

Here's another Charlton Heston. The seller, silentsaregolden, has a number of these Heston's signed in the same pen. They aren't as open and shut as the other Heston I posted but I suspect these are fake too, even though they have the small R's.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/CHARLTON-HESTON-autographed-8X10-photo-RD33...

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Herman Darvick on August 23, 2011 at 6:42pm

Why do you suspect these are fake too? The ones offered by silentsaregolden, i.e. Tom Kramer of Golden Age Autographs, a company that has been around for over 15 years, specializing in vintage autographs.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Brick Hunter on August 23, 2011 at 7:07pm

I'm not sure if you were listing his credentials because you thought I was making an accusation of sorts. I listed it to confer with collectors or experts. Like I said, it's not as open and shut as that other clear forgery and I'm not suggesting in any way that the purveyor is the forger. One of the ones signed in the same marker has a double L. It's not as pronounced as some and it's not one in the same vein of secretarials. I've seen some of those secretarials which have an even smaller R though. Someone earlier in this thread asserted that Charlton Heston also signed Chall. I haven't seen any evidence before or after him of that though. I haven't seen similar "Chall" types that weren't secretarial or clear cut forgeries either. If it's authentic, I think that would be very interesting.

I think Heston only did two public signings and I don't think these came from then. It's possible that they could be a little off because he signed them all at once somewhere and maybe that would even explain the "Chall". It would be interesting to know when and where these were signed. I'm not an expert, just a collector and very open to being wrong.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Herman Darvick on August 23, 2011 at 7:45pm

But you were "making an accusation of sorts." You said: "I suspect these are fake too, even though they have the small R's." I know that you are not suggesting in any way that the purveyor is the forger; but you are suggesting that you suspect that the purveyor, Tom Kramer, is selling forged autographs. That is why I listed some of Tom Kramer's credentials. He is a respected recognized expert on vintage Hollywood autographs.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Brick Hunter on August 23, 2011 at 8:32pm

I wanted to put it up for discussion and put my opinion on them too. I only get mad at the sellers that sell horrible stuff routinely like the seller I mentioned before with the really bad Charlton Heston. The rest is fluid and more open to opinion. Zipper thinks all but one he thinks are authentic and the other secretarial. I presume he means the "Chall". I looked closer and of the three I was talking about, the "Chall" may be signed in a different pen. It's harder to tell because it's a slightly darker picture, signed in a darker region. Besides the H cutting up to cross the T (which I've seen on authentic signed books), I don't know if it follows the same basic structure I see in the usual "Chall" for the most part. Could there have been a second secretary who signed "Chall" too? I'm not sure what conclusion to draw. It could just be the evolution of a signature over time.

I'm still not comfortable with the other two. It may be the variables present when they were signed.