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 Dennis on March 16, 2011 at 4:39am

Here is another photo he signed in person for me in Dallas, TX. I later consigned it to emovieposter.com so their logo appears on this scan, but the photo was signed by Heston. I believe he would sometimes loop the 'r' if he signed quickly.

Dennis

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Michael Barrucci on March 16, 2011 at 4:57am

Having been a big Charlton Heston fan, I've received true autographs from Mr. Heston "in person" in NYC several times over the 1990s, as well as through the mail. Up to this very moment I've always thought that the signatures via mail were as authentically Heston's as the ones he signed for me in person the times I'd met him in New York. I figured his signature was very distinctive and not easy to copy.

I was prepared to balk at this revelation initially...

HOWEVER -- I've just gone and examined my many Heston autographs which I've obtained over the years, and I have to tell you that I must stand corrected! I fear that this article may be correct. All my "in-person" Heston signatures, upon new inspection, contain the distinctive "r" (with the exception of one OMEGA MAN lobby card which was rush-signed at ABC studios in person where Chuck signed for a huge amount of people .. this one sample is not very typical of CH's autograph and is rushed without a distinctive "r" yet the size there still is smaller and looks nothing like the taller "Chall" secretarial versions)...

All the photos I've received in the mail, on the other hand, look uncannily like that "too tall" secretarial "l" variety! I am now semi-devastated because I figured Chuck was not the type to do this, and had always accomodated his fans. I guess I was wrong... I say I am "semi"-devastated because I at least have three "in-person" signatures which I absolutely KNOW are legitimate.

Sorry, but if I'm to be honest I must say that I now am firmly convinced that any CH autograph which APPEARS to read "Chall" is not Heston's actual signature. We all have our own reasons to believe what we believe -- and Dennis, if you know for a fact that you received your "Chall's" in person, that's all you need to know for yourself, and more power to you. But as for me, my own proof from experience is that I have obtained three Heston signatures in person and they're all "Char".... and I have gotten about four or five through the mail - all at different times, mind you - and they all read "Chall". I'm just saying that -- for ME -- that is all I need to be convinced that there was someone other than Heston signing in the mail, and I will never believe that a "Chall" is Heston's autograph.

And the ironic thing about "Chall" signatures is that they usually do NOT look at all rushed - that's part of the mystery. If anything, most of the "Chall" signatures look much more proper and neat, not rushed. Almost too perfect.

The problem with the authors of this article obtaining more "in person" 'Chall' autographs for analysis is that there is ZERO PROOF, unfortunately, that those signatures were ever signed in person. For example -- I have a picture of CH signing an autograph for me in person that my wife took of the two of us -- so all I'd have to do is provide this photo of me and Chuck as evidence of "authenticity", but then I could easily substitute a secretarial-signed bogus photo along with it, if I wanted to.

Somewhere in this online discussion there is an 8x10 photo signed by both Heston and Linda Harrison, from PLANET OF THE APES. In order to "prove its authenticity", there is an accomodating picture of both Heston and Ms. Harrison sitting together at a table at some kind of signing function. Yet, the Heston signature suspiciously reads "Chall". So - does this picture of the two stars smiling together prove that the Heston signature is authentic? Not at all, and I can tell you how I know. I also have a dual signature 8x10 photo from APES which is signed by Linda Harrison and (supposedly) Charlton Heston.... I first got Harrison's autograph IN PERSON at a FANEX convention in 1996... and then I mailed the pic to Heston's home and got it back with a bogus "Chall" autograph on it, next to Linda's. So, in other words, if I were a dealer (I'm not; I'm just a fan) and ever wanted to sell this and pass it off as "authentic", all I need to do is include some photo of Heston and Harrison sitting together at a signing. Right?

As I said, Dennis knows what's what - and it's rough coming here and airing my view of things without unintentionally offending him or anyone else in the process. If he says he obtained the signatures in person with the "Chall", then he did. All I'm saying is, my own real personal experience is far different than his, and so I'll never trust a "Chall" autograph.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rolf Ramseier on March 16, 2011 at 5:09am

Dennis & Joe, thanks for your story's and input which I very welcome.

Especially Dennis examples may bring more confusion into the disscussion, but as Joe stated, if Dennis knows he obtained the signatures In Person then it is a fact we have to accept.

Dennis, do you know the year you got those In Person examples ?

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Michael Barrucci on March 16, 2011 at 5:16am

Aside from the Dennis samples here --- what's to stop an unscrupulous dealer from selling a "Chall" that he got through the mail and then saying he obtained it in person? It's not a comfortable question to ask, but let's be honest and say that it can and probably does happen...

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rolf Ramseier on March 16, 2011 at 5:25am

nothing, that's daily business of some unscrupulos ebay sellers.....

A few years ago ebay suspended a seller his sales were in the 30'000+ items, he always had photos of a black guy with the stars as proof, but none of the items offered was genuine..... oh not forget to mention that he had a 100% positive feedback score, you know ;-)

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Brandon Mysinger on March 16, 2011 at 6:11am

Autograph Czar!

Ahhh, I remember that case so vividly.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Brandon Mysinger on March 16, 2011 at 10:34am

I actually sent this to Steve on day 1 and he said that the guy they use now is very careful because he was aware of Rolf's past study and they are aware of this study now too.

I don't think the review of "old" GAI coas is specific. I would tell anyone that questions an item to send it to steve for review. ssipe@globalauthentics.com

I can't speak to what actions they will take but I know he will gladly answer that for you.

I hope that helps. Until then, I will work on getting Global Authentics "official" statement

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by CJCollector on March 16, 2011 at 6:19am

I also want to state that 99.99% of sellers of forgeries that I have exposed over the years had 100% feedback on Ebay. Feedback is in no way reflective of whether a seller sells authentic autographs or forgeries. Feedback doesn't differentiate between the two. Sellers of forgeries always ship fast and that's what the buyer responds to.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Zarelli on March 16, 2011 at 8:22am

I'd like to see double L "in-persons" from more than one source. Thus far, every other in-person photo that has emerged supports the theory.

By the way, there are two other indicators in these supposed in-persons that indicate secretarial. It's not just the double L.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rolf Ramseier on March 16, 2011 at 8:40am

I agree Steve, more double L "in-persons" are in need from other sources, otherwise it would not change my mind on the secretarials...

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by DB on March 16, 2011 at 8:46am

not just pictures and claims as I said, "i have not budged one iota" on those pictures submitted and the overwhelming evidence appears to be otherwise - need to hear more from the "Joes" of the world,

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Zarelli on March 16, 2011 at 8:54am

The other consideration is, why do the double L's consistantly come through the mail ON PHOTOS but NOT books? If the double L was an "authentic variant," wouldn't it appear on TTM books just as frequently as TTM photos?

Occam's razor. There is only one logical answer here.