|
|
Post by sloanrodgers on Mar 7, 2011 17:34:22 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by sloanrodgers on Mar 8, 2011 18:45:50 GMT -5
I contacted this Ebay seller and told him that his 26 pound cannon ball has no connection with the battle of San Jacinto
as his item is too large. He basically said that he doesn't care about all the contemporary accounts and witness testimony
and is just trying to get as much as he can for his ball. He's simply looking for a gullible sucker.
|
|
|
|
Post by sloanrodgers on Mar 24, 2011 18:09:54 GMT -5
Here's the San Jacinto Bowie Knife that was advertised as belonging to San Jacinto battle veteran McGrady Montgomery on an Ebay auction in 2008. I contacted the Ebay administrators back then and informed them that there "apparently" wasn't any evidence that Montgomery served at San Jacinto and they eventually closed the auction for this alleged battle relic down. Apparently, the previous auction hasn't deterred the owner of this piece and it is now being described as belonging to a dead Mexican soldier that was retrieved by Montgomery after the battle. Montgomery didn't join Capt. James P. Price's company, Col. C. H. Harrison's Kentucky Volunteer Regiment until June 10, 1836, but I don't know when he actually arrived in Texas to rummage around battlegrounds. www.liveauctioneers.com/item/2991788 |
|
|
|
Post by Paul Sylvain on Mar 24, 2011 20:17:39 GMT -5
Among other things, this guy can't write a grammatical sentence, either. Well, I guess he gave you an honest answer when you contacted him. To quote Steve Miller, "Woo-hoo-hoo --- take the money and run." Paul |
|
|
|
Post by Allen Wiener on Mar 24, 2011 22:33:27 GMT -5
A con man around every corner, or under every rock, sometimes hiding in plain sight, where most people don't seem to notice them when they see them. Con men succeed because the sucker, or "mark" wants to believe the con man. Sad.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Young on Mar 27, 2011 13:17:07 GMT -5
A con man around every corner, or under every rock, sometimes hiding in plain sight, where most people don't seem to notice them when they see them. Con men succeed because the sucker, or "mark" wants to believe the con man. Sad.  Alamo artifacts are like pieces of the True Cross... |
|
|
|
Post by Paul Sylvain on Mar 27, 2011 14:40:11 GMT -5
A con man around every corner, or under every rock, sometimes hiding in plain sight, where most people don't seem to notice them when they see them. Con men succeed because the sucker, or "mark" wants to believe the con man. Sad. Alamo artifacts are like pieces of the True Cross... You mean those bits of wood those old padres and nuns showed me as relics when I was a kid weren't the real deal? I'm crushed. |
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Young on Mar 27, 2011 14:44:27 GMT -5
...just like that rifle grampa smith used to have...
|
|
|
|
Post by mjbrathwaite on Mar 27, 2011 18:31:29 GMT -5
It may be slightly off the topic, but many years ago in an antique store, I found some pictures of famous Americans, including Sam Houston. His was a photograph. They all appeared to be autographed, Houston's in blue ink. Being able to afford only one, I bought the George Washington one, although I could not (and still cannot) tell if the signature was written in ink or printed on the page. The dealer, who seemed honest and was charging only $32 each for them, told me he hadn't been able to tell either. A few years later, when I was in that town again, I looked for the store in the hope of finding the Sam Houston one still there, but the store had closed. Ever since, I've wondered if famous people autographed pictures in those days, and am wondering if anyone can shed any light on this.
|
|
|
|
Post by Paul Sylvain on Mar 27, 2011 19:32:48 GMT -5
Interesting. Have you ever seen shows like "Pawn Stars" or "Pickers" on TV? Pawn Stars is interesting because at various times people will bring in something purportedly thought to have been signed by someone like Paul Revere or a an early president. Invariably the guys in the shop bring in some expert who examines the signature or document in question and renders a verdict as to authenticity.
One wonders if the item you describe would really be genuine, considering what you paid for it. I'm not certain of these people simply autographed items back then or not. I guess I would see that as questionable -- it was long before the period of rock stars and all-star major league athletes, but perhaps "celebrity" was valued in those days, too.
I also wonder about the ink. Was there blue ink back then? I don't know, but I'm guessing it might have been.
Paul
|
|
|
|
Post by sloanrodgers on Mar 27, 2011 20:16:03 GMT -5
I also wonder about the ink. Was there blue ink back then? I don't know, but I'm guessing it might have been. I believe they've had blue inks for hundreds of years, but I don't think it was considered the easiest to make or the most stable color. I guess the authenticity of the signed Sam Houston photo would have depended on the signature's form and whether the ink that was used is consistent with the blue inks of Houston's time. We'll probably never know unless the picture turns up for auction somewhere. It could happen.  |
|
|
|
Post by mjbrathwaite on Mar 28, 2011 16:55:26 GMT -5
Thanks Paul and RangerRod. We have an English program called "Antiques Roadshow" here, but when autographed photos turn up on it they are of pop stars and film stars, and their authenticity is not usually questioned, except in the case of the Beatles, as it's known their roadies etc. signed a lot of the autographs. I've never known if my George and Ringo ones are genuine, although they look like the real thing and when I was a bank examiner I wouldn't have considered them forgeries. Still, I know a record dealer who bought a worn out LP of my favourite singer, P.J. Proby, because his name was written on it in ink and the dealer assumed it was autographed, but I had the sad duty of telling him it looked nothing like any of the ones Proby's signed for me over the last 35 years, all of which are identical. I've long regretted not buying the Sam Houston photo, as with the advent of the internet, it would probably be easier now to find out what his signature looked like than it would have been in 1984, when I bought the George Washington picture.
|
|
|
|
Post by Paul Sylvain on Mar 28, 2011 18:30:23 GMT -5
P.J. Proby? I haven't heard that name in .... decades! As far as the Beatles, I do have a buddy who has a genuine Pete Best autograph -- he met Pete in his travels some years ago. Pretty cool.
We have the (U.S. version of) the Antiques Roadshow here, too, and I have seen the BBC version once or twice.
|
|
|
|
Post by sloanrodgers on Mar 28, 2011 19:09:30 GMT -5
Thanks Paul and RangerRod. We have an English program called "Antiques Roadshow" here, but when autographed photos turn up on it they are of pop stars and film stars, and their authenticity is not usually questioned, except in the case of the Beatles, as it's known their roadies etc. signed a lot of the autographs. I've never known if my George and Ringo ones are genuine, although they look like the real thing and when I was a bank examiner I wouldn't have considered them forgeries. Still, I know a record dealer who bought a worn out LP of my favourite singer, P.J. Proby, because his name was written on it in ink and the dealer assumed it was autographed, but I had the sad duty of telling him it looked nothing like any of the ones Proby's signed for me over the last 35 years, all of which are identical. I've long regretted not buying the Sam Houston photo, as with the advent of the internet, it would probably be easier now to find out what his signature looked like than it would have been in 1984, when I bought the George Washington picture. Well, I don't know much about different ink types or chemistry, but I do draw a little, so I know some problems with old ink. Coincidentally, I just bought what I believe is a rare 1936 centennial folio of twelve drawings of Texas revolutionary heroes at a used bookstore. Sadly they're only the well-known Anglo patriots and none of them are signed by the subjects. They're still pretty cool and a lucky discovery. |
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Young on Mar 28, 2011 19:26:01 GMT -5
Thanks Paul and RangerRod. We have an English program called "Antiques Roadshow" here, but when autographed photos turn up on it they are of pop stars and film stars, and their authenticity is not usually questioned, except in the case of the Beatles, as it's known their roadies etc. signed a lot of the autographs. I've never known if my George and Ringo ones are genuine, although they look like the real thing and when I was a bank examiner I wouldn't have considered them forgeries. Still, I know a record dealer who bought a worn out LP of my favourite singer, P.J. Proby, because his name was written on it in ink and the dealer assumed it was autographed, but I had the sad duty of telling him it looked nothing like any of the ones Proby's signed for me over the last 35 years, all of which are identical. I've long regretted not buying the Sam Houston photo, as with the advent of the internet, it would probably be easier now to find out what his signature looked like than it would have been in 1984, when I bought the George Washington picture. Well, I don't know much about different ink types or chemistry, but I do draw a little, so I know some problems with old ink. Coincidentally, I just bought what I believe is a rare 1936 centennial folio of twelve drawings of Texas revolutionary heroes at a used bookstore. Sadly they're only the well-known Anglo patriots and none of them are signed by the subjects. They're still pretty cool and a lucky discovery. Good find indeed. |
|
