Scripto | Transcribe Page

Log in to Scripto | Recent changes | View item | View file

Copy of a letter from Allan Marquand to Charles Henry Hart, 18 February 1917 [page 2 of 3]

https://transcribe.frick.org/files/ArtNotPurchased/3107300004365_038_POST.jpg

« previous page | next page » |

You don't have permission to transcribe this page.

Current Page Transcription [history]

2. with some hesitation I lay before you the basic of my remarks, showing all the signatures which I have had the opportunity of observing. These show signatures (1) in capitals (2) in cursives. The Cursives are more likely to be autograph signature; they occur more frequently on plaster or terra cotta busts, but also on marble (c.s. franklin, the Vestal) The signatures in capitals are sometimes as in (1) and (2) finely carved, elsewhere more roughly as in (9) and (12). Sometimes evident fakes as in (16). Sometimes on the bust, again on the pedestal (see list) But even when in cursive and on the bust, a signature may be unauthentic (is the Sabinet Houdon bust and signature authentic>) I confess I do not know whether the cursive signature you refer to p.138 of your book, is autographic or not. You can tell as you possess letters by Houdon. But even without this almost every signature I have seen in cursives seems to me authentic, i.e., done by Houdon himself, or cast from his signature. In 1777 it is true that Houdon exhibited some 30 works, not, however, all in marble, nor all made in that year (as the Miromesnil bust if I remember aright was exhibited in plaster in 1775 and in marble in 1777). How far Houdon, like Rodin and others, availed himself of marble cutters to execute his busts I do not know, but even if he has, as you suppose, executed the busts himself and turned over the slight task of signature to a stone cutter, the fact of a signature in capital letters, whether on the bust or pedestal, is no evidence against the authenticity of the bust. I am inclined to believe on general principles a sculptor who cared to have a marble bust or statue bear his signature would sign it (or have some stone cutter sign it) in capital letters, as his predecessors and contemporaries usually or often did. I am inclined to believe that the signatures (1) and (2) are autograph, because they are finely cut and identical. This is an hypothesis, if you please ad ignorantiam. But on the other hand, id you should assert that these signatures are by some other stone cutter, this

You don't have permission to discuss this page.

Current Page Discussion [history]