40 replies to this topic

[teufelhunde.ret]

WOW: bidding starts at 10K http://www.ebay.com/...984.m1438.l2649

From the seller:

COMES WITH NOTARIZED AFFIDAVIT OF AUTHENTICITY - GENERAL LEWIS BURWELL CHESTY PULLER'S USMC BOAT CLOAK - MADE FOR HIM IN 1926 & WORN BY HIM THROUGHOUT HIS CAREER.

CHESTY PULLER IS THE MOST DECORATED UNITED STATES MARINE IN HISTORY - HE ENLISTED IN THE MARINES AS A PRIVATE AFTER ATTENDING THE VIRGINIA MILITARY INSTITUTE FOR A YEAR IN 1917. HE ATTENDED NCO SCHOOL & OCS - UPON GRADUATION FROM OCS IN 1919 HE WAS APPOINTED TO SECOND LIEUTENANT IN THE RESERVES - REDUCTION IN FORCE FOLLOWING THE WAR LED TO HIM BEING PUT ON INACTIVE STATUS 10 DAYS LATER & GIVEN THE RANK OF CORPORAL.

HE SERVED AS A CORPORAL FOR SEVERAL YEARS & WAS RECOMMISSIONED AS A SECOND LIEUTENANT IN 1924 WHEN HE RETURNED STATESIDE. HE RETIRED IN 1955 AFTER MANY YEARS OF DEDICATED & HONORABLE SERVICE AS A 3 STAR LIEUTENANT GENERAL. HE WAS AWARDED 5 NAVY CROSSES (THE ONLY MARINE EVER), THE DISTINGUISHED SERVICE CROSS, A SILVER STAR & NUMEROUS OTHER AWARDS FROM THE U.S. & FOREIGN COUNTRIES.

IT IS EXTREMELY RARE TO FIND A VINTAGE MILITARY BOAT CLOAK LET ALONE ONE WORN BY THE MOST DECORATED UNITED STATES MARINE EVER. THE CLOAK COMES WITH A NOTARIZED AFFIDAVIT FROM SGT. MAJOR FARRELL USMC, THE PREVIOUS OWNER OF THE BOAT CLOAK & A FRAMED PICTURE OF CHESTY.

Attached Images

• 

[teufelhunde.ret]

.

Attached Images

• 
• 

[teufelhunde.ret]

.

Attached Images

• 
• 

[teufelhunde.ret]

.

Attached Images

• 

[Jack's Son]

The cloak may well be Chesty's, but not determined by a piece of paper with a worthless notary stamp on it. I'll keep my money in the bank....thank you!!

[Dave]

The cloak may well be Chesty's, but not determined by a piece of paper with a worthless notary stamp on it. I'll keep my money in the bank....thank you!!

Letter notwithstanding, the tailor's label in the cloak is legit. I have no problem with it's attribution to Gen. Puller.

Now the price? That's "optimistic"....

[Patriot]

The problem with selling something of this magnitude is that you will have 100 naysayers to every one person who vouches for its authenticity. The truth is that unless this item is handled by the most reliable and experienced dealers in the business, who are able to offer sufficient research and supporting evidence, such an item is destined to rest in the dust bin of skepticism among the collecting community.

With that being said, when does such an item become authentic? Not every uniform comes with papers from the original wearer of the coat. In fact, such uniforms are quite unusual. I have seen plenty of Civil War uniforms that are attributed, but do not have supporting evidence beyond what is in the coat. Nonetheless, such uniforms will routinely bring in the premium that named pieces command.

Where does one make the distinction? The label looks right. The label was obviously typed, and then sewn before the coat was finished.

:dunno:

[Dave]

The problem with selling something of this magnitude is that you will have 100 naysayers to every one person who vouches for its authenticity. The truth is that unless this item is handled by the most reliable and experienced dealers in the business, who are able to offer sufficient research and supporting evidence, such an item is destined to rest in the dust bin of skepticism among the collecting community.

With that being said, when does such an item become authentic? Not every uniform comes with papers from the original wearer of the coat. In fact, such uniforms are quite unusual. I have seen plenty of Civil War uniforms that are attributed, but do not have supporting evidence beyond what is in the coat. Nonetheless, such uniforms will routinely bring in the premium that named pieces command.

Where does one make the distinction? The label looks right. The label was obviously typed, and then sewn before the coat was finished.

:dunno:

It boils down to whatever the buyer is comfortable with. Personally, I'm comfortable with the label in the cloak...I've seen hundreds of similar labels and this one is a-okay in my book. The only thing that could top the current provenance is having a photo of the General wearing this exact cloak based on some abnormality or distinctive feature of the cloak. I personally don't trust letters, even those from the original wearers, as it's far too easy to have someone do a bait-and-switch...they sell the legit uniform based on labels (or whatever) and make up a second uniform and put the letter with it...viola...two uniforms (and potentially big money) for the price of one!

The most iron-clad provenance I ever had on a uniform was for a WW1 pilot. The original collector had the veteran write a letter to accompany the uniform and took photos of the veteran writing the letter with the uniform next to him. Pretty much impossible to top that provenance! (That uniform now resides with someone here on the forum!)

But it boils down to whatever someone wants to spend their money on. If Jack's Son isn't comfortable with the label, then so be it. If I wasn't comfortable with it, I definitely would keep my money too! :thumbsup: (Not saying I'm going to buy this, but if I did have tons of cash and I didn't mind overpaying for something...I might consider it...)

Dave

[Patriot]

It boils down to whatever the buyer is comfortable with. Personally, I'm comfortable with the label in the cloak...I've seen hundreds of similar labels and this one is a-okay in my book. The only thing that could top the current provenance is having a photo of the General wearing this exact cloak based on some abnormality or distinctive feature of the cloak. I personally don't trust letters, even those from the original wearers, as it's far too easy to have someone do a bait-and-switch...they sell the legit uniform based on labels (or whatever) and make up a second uniform and put the letter with it...viola...two uniforms (and potentially big money) for the price of one!

The most iron-clad provenance I ever had on a uniform was for a WW1 pilot. The original collector had the veteran write a letter to accompany the uniform and took photos of the veteran writing the letter with the uniform next to him. Pretty much impossible to top that provenance! (That uniform now resides with someone here on the forum!)

But it boils down to whatever someone wants to spend their money on. If Jack's Son isn't comfortable with the label, then so be it. If I wasn't comfortable with it, I definitely would keep my money too! :thumbsup: (Not saying I'm going to buy this, but if I did have tons of cash and I didn't mind overpaying for something...I might consider it...)

Dave

That's another matter entirely - determining value. With rare general issue items, such as a D Day Assault Vest, or Confederate frock coat, there are past sales to which we can base our asking price on. However, in the case of unique items, named to top brass, the sky can definitely be the limit. There is always a limit of what collectors will pay, but I suspect that $10,000 is within reason for someone who doesn't care so much for money as they do what is in their collection.

I like it, but like you I am not liking it to the tune of 10,000 beans, cannolis, or whatever our dollar is equatable these days.....

[Dave]

I like it, but like you I am not liking it to the tune of 10,000 beans, cannolis, or whatever our dollar is equatable these days.....

I would prefer 10,000 cannolis over this boat cloak, that's for sure...

Attached Images

• 

[Sabrejet]

Before shelling out that kind of money (even if I had it!!) I'd want it combed for fibres or hairs to be matched against Puller's DNA!

[Patriot]

I would prefer 10,000 cannolis over this boat cloak, that's for sure...

[seanmc1114]

Before shelling out that kind of money (even if I had it!!) I'd want it combed for fibres or hairs to be matched against Puller's DNA!

But then you have the issue of verifying the authenticity of your DNA source.

[CNY Militaria]

Similar experience with my MG Donovan Uniform--despite iron clad provenance and photos of him wearing the uniform, there were still naysayers when I posted it here. All comes down to how comfortable one is taking that "risk."

Edited by CNY Militaria, 08 March 2012 - 09:52 AM.

[SEABEEBRIAN]

Similar experience with my MG Donovan Uniform--despite iron clad provenance and photos of him wearing the uniform, there were still naysayers when I posted it here. All comes down to how comfortable one is taking that "risk."

I think you misunderstood my remarks about the jacket

[CNY Militaria]

I wasn't specifically referring to you-- I received several PM's about it questioning it until explanation was given.

[Dave]

I wasn't specifically referring to you-- I received several PM's about it questioning it until explanation was given.

Ahhh....the "I can't believe it's real because it's not in my collection" syndrome....

[4STARCHRIS]

Wonder if this is the guy?
This is from 1965.
4starchris

Edited by 4STARCHRIS, 08 March 2012 - 12:51 PM.

[bheskett]

Ahhh....the "I can't believe it's real because it's not in my collection" syndrome....

I love the uniform and would love to own it but like the rest of you. Way to rich for my blood. Like the above I have noticed on this forum many have the antique store deeler attitude "If I own it its gold, if you own it its junk."

Just an observation.

Bob

[Jack's Son]

I have a Navy Cross that has been identified by the Marine's former wife, and his girlfriend at the time of his death.
BUT, because the NC is not engraved with the recipient's name.......there will always be doubters , OH WELL!!
It's REAL to me. :thumbsup: