Forum Title: LIZZIE BORDEN SOCIETY
Topic Area: Second Street Second-Hand Shop
Topic Name: Lizzie Signature for sale

1. "Lizzie Signature for sale"
Posted by stefani on May-21st-03 at 11:00 PM

Well, experts, is this live or is it memorex?


2. "Re: Lizzie Signature for sale"
Posted by Tina-Kate on May-21st-03 at 11:19 PM
In response to Message #1.

Just by itself on a teeny piece of paper (whose edges seem awfully fresh cut)?  Aqua ink?

I dunno...


3. "Re: Lizzie Signature for sale"
Posted by Tina-Kate on May-21st-03 at 11:41 PM
In response to Message #2.

Not to say aqua ink was not available, but my 1901 catalogue only lists ink for sale in red, blue & black.


4. "Re: Lizzie Signature for sale"
Posted by Tina-Kate on May-22nd-03 at 9:38 AM
In response to Message #3.

Does anyone know if aqua colored ink was available in Lizzie's day?  Even in the 20s?  This would be useful to know.

I did a search re the history of ink, but could find no info.  Altho black ink seems to dominate since ancient times.

What made me think of this is that my mother has always had a penchant for using a fountain pen with green ink.  However, my mother was born in 1935 & certainly didn't learn to use a fountain pen until at least the 40s.


5. "Re: Lizzie Signature for sale"
Posted by william on May-22nd-03 at 10:27 AM
In response to Message #1.

This signature is identical to one in a book that was purported to be Lizzie's signature.  The book was offered on Supernaught.com auction gallery in February, 2002, entitled "Germany and England." by L.A. Cramb.  It was published in 1914.

I don't know if they had aqua ink in Lizzie's day.  If they did, is should exhibit some signs of fading.

I enlarged the signature and received the distict impression that it was aqua ink applied over black ink.


6. "Re: Lizzie Signature for sale"
Posted by harry on May-22nd-03 at 10:40 AM
In response to Message #1.

Unless I missed it, it doesn't say where this signature is from. That is indeed an odd color ink and would certainly have not been used on any formal document.

We know(?) she signed her books but I would really doubt she went around giving autographs. At least, I have never heard of any.

If it came from a book, it would seem to me the book combined with the autograph would be worth more than just the sutograph by itself.

Looks kinda suspicious to me.


7. "Re: Lizzie Signature for sale"
Posted by Edisto on May-22nd-03 at 11:14 AM
In response to Message #4.

A huge number of different pigments were available in Lizzie's day, so one could probably obtain ink in practically any color one might wish.  (There have "always" been artist's inks in a rainbow of colors.)  It seems likelier to me that the signature was once another color and faded out to "aqua" (if that's what color it is now).  One thing to consider, though, is that it wasn't socially acceptable in Lizzie's day to use any ink color other than blue or black for any kind of formal document or correspondence.  It was considered crass.
I haven't looked at the eBay listing for this item yet, but I would be very suspicious unless it has an ironclad provenance.  One thing I would want to compare it to is a signature from that account book that has been offered on eBay so many times.  Someone may have found a way to use it to make a little money!  (I don't know who owns it now, so I'm not accusing anyone in particular.)

I've now looked at the listing and would say the provenance is in no way ironclad.  It's hardly even tinfoil-clad.  I'm gonna ask the seller a couple of questions and see what he/she says, assuming nobody with more money than brains scoops it up first!  The ink is described as "Green Quill."  I don't know what that means...

To give you an idea how reliable this seller's info may be, he's also selling an autograph of "JJ Astor," whom he describes as a Titanic Survivor.  I'm no expert on the Titanic, but even I know that John Jacob Astor, IV, WENT DOWN with the Titanic!  I wouldn't exactly describe him as a survivor.  There were, of course, others with the name "John Jacob Astor," but the only one who survived the Titanic was the unborn son of this J. J. Astor.  (Well, I guess technically he might be called a Titanic survivor, and maybe he's the one who signed this.  I hope he didn't sign it in utero; those quill pens have sharp points!)
Judging by the seller's other items, he (or maybe she)was referring to green ink that was made for quill pens.  But I don't think quill pens were much in use after metal nibs became generally available. 

(Message last edited May-22nd-03  12:26 PM.)


8. "Re: Lizzie Signature for sale"
Posted by stefani on May-22nd-03 at 1:06 PM
In response to Message #7.

I too enlarged the image and applied some unmask sharp filters and I see the black ink below the aqua. The dot after the A is particularly black.

William, I was unable to match this sig to any others. I have the one from the book saved and it is different in some ways than this. I will post it here so you can see.





(Message last edited May-22nd-03  1:07 PM.)


9. "Re: Lizzie Signature for sale"
Posted by stefani on May-22nd-03 at 1:09 PM
In response to Message #8.

Here is my enlarged/unmasked copy of the sig on ebay now.



(Message last edited May-22nd-03  1:10 PM.)


10. "Re: Lizzie Signature for sale"
Posted by rays on May-22nd-03 at 5:05 PM
In response to Message #1.

Caveat Emptor.
What is the provenance?
...
E Radin notes that people's signatures varies over time. An EXACT copy is just that: a copy. "Questioned Documents" is the art and science of detecting forgeries. Very important for museums & such.

(Message last edited May-22nd-03  7:38 PM.)


11. "Re: Lizzie Signature for sale"
Posted by charlie on May-22nd-03 at 5:39 PM
In response to Message #9.

It is the sellers roll to tell a bit about the autograph if it is authentic. When did he acquired it? Where? From whom? Why does he believe it to be genuine? This sellers seems to not want to talk too much about this prized item in his collection. Seems to me that after spending years collecting these things, he would be full of conversation.

As for the color, it is almost neon. Give me a break! I'd bet my left arm its a fake. I've done historical research for over 25 years and have never seen a color even approching it. Plus, most inks change colors over the years, blues tend to turn a pale purple, black often turns pale brown. It has to do with the pigments being affected differently by years of oxidation.

Someone else mentioned the paper looks recently cut. The edges look like they was cut some time last week if you ask me. It's just not a normal look unless he trimmed it recently. If so, he did a terrible job to such a valuable piece.

Also, the paper was stained by a liquid at some point in time. Certainly the stain wasn't there when Lizzie signed it. The ink would have been smudged and would have run, I've seen that a million times on antique documents. I'm sure Lizzie wasn't running around signing things with water proof ink either.

Further, the signature matches the "known" sample too well. It looks like it was copied right out of the book. Do you sign your name exactly the same throughout your entire life? Everyone's signature evolves throughout their lifetime. It's a fake. Don't waste your money.


12. "Re: Lizzie Signature for sale"
Posted by stefani on May-22nd-03 at 6:11 PM
In response to Message #11.

Hi Charlie! Yes, yes, and yes. I agree with everything you said.

The seller went on a bit too much about being sick and having to sell his precious collection. That sort of thing is not important to anyone. Better to tell the history of the piece, not the reason why the sale. Suspicious.


13. "Re: Lizzie Signature for sale"
Posted by Edisto on May-22nd-03 at 8:26 PM
In response to Message #11.

Yes, well...a lot of eBay sellers either pretend to be ignorant or actually are ignorant about what they're selling.  Before bidding on an item from an unknown seller, I almost always "ask seller a question," whether it's a legitimate one or not.  The seller's reaction can be quite interesting.  Someone who's very defensive and who basically says, "I know what I'm talking about.  Case closed," isn't someone I'd want to deal with.  I've sent this seller a couple of questions and gotten no response thus far.  There's a bid on the item, though, which quashes the "Buy It Now."  Incidentally, eBay has apparently gotten quite gun-shy about autographs of any kind.  There's a new policy that applies only to them.  I wish there were similar strict requirements on all antique items, because I've never seen a venue as chockful of fakes as eBay is.  "Caveat emptor" indeed!


14. " Lizzie Signature for sale?"
Posted by Kat on May-23rd-03 at 12:56 AM
In response to Message #9.




(Message last edited May-23rd-03  12:57 AM.)


15. "Re:  Lizzie Signature for sale?"
Posted by Edisto on May-23rd-03 at 8:31 AM
In response to Message #14.

Well, to tell you the honest truth, that's about the amount of variation I'd expect to see in two signatures from the same person.  However, that still doesn't mean the eBay signature is valid (far from it).  Still haven't heard anything from the seller, whose name is apparently "Bill."  Last night, I tried to glean what I could from his feedback.  Virtually all of his auctions have been "private" ones for some reason.  Also, he has done considerable buying on eBay (that accounts for a lot of his positive feedback).  I wanted to see if he was still buying while claiming to be "liquidating" his collection.  That doesn't appear to be the case.  Most of his recent listings have the same boilerplate in them, about his reason for selling.  They're all worded almost identically.  Interesting that he doesn't respond to email.  That by itself is enough to make me suspicious.


16. "Re:  Lizzie Signature for sale?"
Posted by Kat on May-23rd-03 at 10:51 PM
In response to Message #15.

I thought about including the sample signature from the dividend book to compare with these, but decided I didn't wish to give that away, if someone might take it and use/or copy it.


17. "Re:  Lizzie Signature for sale?"
Posted by Tina-Kate on May-24th-03 at 3:15 PM
In response to Message #16.

Very interesting comments from everyone!  Good to find out a few things & do some homework before bidding/buying.

I think it must take guts to buy anything thru eBay.  I'm too cheap to risk it!


18. "Re:  Lizzie Signature for sale?"
Posted by Edisto on May-24th-03 at 5:41 PM
In response to Message #17.

That supposed signature went for $362.76!  At the beginning, there was a Buy-It-Now for $300.  I guess it didn't matter to those bidders that the seller didn't respond to emails.  (Or maybe he just took a dislike to me and didn't respond to MY emails.)  Supposedly the value for Lizzie's signature was around $l,000 several years ago.  The market for collectibles is quite depressed right now though, so it could be valued at less these days.  Even if this signature was genuine (which I think very unlikely) it wasn't the best kind of autograph, since it had no context or provenance.  I don't know enough about autographs to risk that kind of money.  However I've had very good luck with items about which I do know something.  I get in touch with the seller and ask questions before I bid.  Some may be questions to which I already know the answers.  eBay can be a fun place to buy, but it is a bit of a gamble.
The other day, I emailed a guy who was selling an antique doll.  I recognized the doll and knew it wasn't produced by the company that he said made it.  I asked him how he identified the manufacturer.  He said his mother-in-law (who owned the doll) identified it from a clothing tag.  It was easy to see that the tagged clothing on the doll was the wrong size and therefore didn't belong to the doll being sold!  As a result of the misidentificatin, it may sell for a lot less than it's really worth.  I also know the clothing, while not correct for this doll, has considerable value on its own.  I'm watching the auction carefully.


19. "Re:  Lizzie Signature for sale?"
Posted by charlie on May-31st-03 at 10:44 AM
In response to Message #18.

You know, the more I think about this "signature," the more I'm convinced that people who bid on these things are not playing with a full deck. Imagine, buying an old, stained scrap of paper that the seller (who you know nothing about and won't even answer questions) claims was signed by someone a century ago, and paying over $360.00 for it. The seller offers no proof that he didn't just sit down at his kitchen table one night and copy the signature out of a book. Talk about blind faith!

I heard an estimate that 80% of the autographs for sale on Ebay are fakes. Ever wonder how someone who lives in Alabama seems to have access to thousands of Hollywood celebrity autographs? And then there's the "certificate of authenticity," another waste of paper. Oh yes, and then some offer a lifetime, money back guarantee if the autograph is determined to be fake. Well, how does one prove it's fake? Scientific testing in a laboratory? That would cost more than the value of the autograph itself. And then see if the seller ever responds to you email request for a refund. What a suckers game.

In Lizzie's day, there was little or no reason to be signing much of anything. No doubt there were a few legal documents such as her purchase agreements for real estate, her will, and she seems to have put her name on her personal books, but that's about it. If I saw a personal check signed by her I might be inclined to believe in it, but who knows if she ever had a checking account.

And, the truth of the matter, while Lizzie was alive, there was no interest in saving her signature. She was a local oddity, that's about it. Autograph collections 100 years ago were limited to presidents, the founding fathers and world renown scientist and inventors. Lizzie wouldn't be elevated to superstar status for decades. A hundred years ago, there was no motivation to save any of Lizzie's belongings. Any that have survived, did so purely by accident.

The whole idea of buying such an unsubstantiated autograph is a mystery to me. Then again, when it comes to Lizzie, everything is a mystery.


20. "Re:  Lizzie Signature for sale?"
Posted by Edisto on May-31st-03 at 6:11 PM
In response to Message #19.

I think all those books that have been sold on eBay with Lizzie's supposed signature in them are fakes too.  It's known that she had a bookplate when she lived at Maplecroft and used it to identify her books.  It wasn't the kind with a signature on it.  The COAs that went with those books (which are, as you said, useless) didn't even say the signatures were genuine.  All they said was that the books came from "the Lizzie Borden collection," or some such wording.  The guy who signed the COA is someone I've met through the Internet, and he admitted to me that he knows little about autographs and once bought an autograph of a noted author, only to learn later that the author had died several years before the autograph was supposedly signed! Some authority!
However, someone was trying to sell on eBay an 1800s ledger in which stockholders apparently signed for their dividends.  It was signed by both Emma and Lizzie Borden, and I believe those signatures were valid.  The problem was that the seller wanted a fortune for the ledger, and the signatures (four each for Emma and Lizzie) really couldn't be separated without ruining the value of the piece.
IMHO, someone like Lizzie Borden would have been required to sign her name quite often in those days.  No electronic transfers; everything was a cash or paper transaction.  It was common to "sign for" purchases and be sent a bill at the end of the month.  I'll bet there were once tons of Lizzie autographs out there, but, as you say, they had little value until long after she was gone.



 

Navagation

LizzieAndrewBorden.com © 2001-2008 Stefani Koorey. All Rights Reserved. Copyright Notice.
PearTree Press, P.O. Box 9585, Fall River, MA 02720

 

Page updated 12 October, 2003