Is PROVENANCE just a story ?

[manayunkman]

It appears that we all seem to be on the same page.

 

Provenance is based on facts that come into play in a linear nature.

 

For example:

 

A gun is made with a certain serial #. The manufactures records ( serial # ) show that it bought by so and so in 1930.

 

In 1943 so and so does such and such with the gun and their story is in a 1944 issue of life.

 

In 1970 so and so passes on and the family has a big auction house sell the gun and other memorabilia .

 

Twenty years latter the bidder sells the gun and other items with the 1970 auction papers.

 

You can see the lineage and the facts to back it up.

 

Now that was an easy illustration but it doesn't always come that easy.

 

And that's where these guys are tripping themselves up in these current threads.

 

They present an item with a story hoping that the story will some how make the item.

 

The interesting part is that, in at least one case, the story can be easily substantiated with facts.

 

Someone already pointed out some common sense circumstantial evidence that helps.

 

Can circumstantial evidence be provenance ?

[Hookemhorns88]

Since I try to collect "all things" related to WWII I am NOT an expert in any one area. I correlate the story, or provenance, with the item to authenticate that it is a period piece. To me, having the story is a bonus with having to the actual item.

 

I buy a lot of items at Flea Markets. I cannot tell you how many times I will pick up a WWII item in a booth full of miscellaneous junk and the dealer, who certainly is not a militaria expert, will immediately start talking about the item; whose it was, where it came from, etc., etc. just to justify what they are asking for it. Fortunately for me I do know enough, at times, to ask the right questions or look for a dated label or something. And yes, there has been times where I found a label in the pocket much to the dismay of the dealer to de-bunk their "story". To me, it is all about honesty and integrity. I know that there were times, when I first started collecting, that I was taken by someone. Certainly I was at fault some too by not doing the proper research before purchasing the said piece.

[manayunkman]

I would love to here from Luxembourg as he is a tough customer.

 

Any of the "on line" collectors have experiences with provenance ?

 

Provenance is quickly becoming a very important aspect of the hobby.

 

What are your thoughts ??

[38Driver]

I think it's become increasingly important for the wrong reason. The guy at the flea market telling a story is trying to maximize his profit. At the same time, how many "collectors" are at the flea market hoping to find a "steal" they can then turnaround and sell with a story to maximize their profit.

 

I know I sound cynical, but how many times have people here on this forum bought something, then run home and asked "what did I get?" hoping they've struck gold. I would love to know the percentage of focused collectors of history Vs the percentage of buy it to sell it for more "collectors"

 

I think even the use of the word provenance probably is not the best as it suggests an air of historical legitimacy when someone is asking when their main concern is potential profit, not preserving history.

 

Understand this isn't meant as a condemnation of folks who buy and sell. That's their choice. And it doesn't mean there aren't people who are genuinely looking to know the history of different items. But just based on my time on this forum, it seems clear the serious collectors of history are far out numbered by the casual collectors hoping to strike gold. And in that regard having a good story is how you increase your chances of doing so.

[RedLegGI]

I've shifted my collecting to OIF/OEF this year and provenance is an absolutely vital for this. Take ACU's or multicam uniforms, with the velcro it makes it incredibly easy to fake these uniforms. I personally wont pick these up unless they're vet direct because without that provenance statement, to me, it leaves so much open to doubt. There are so many things I see on ebay right now that are 'authentic' or 'real' that just make me shake my head and feel bad for someone who picks it up thinking its real. Its important to pay attention now to whats being sold so that in 10 years, you know exactly what the market was like and what was available. There are some items that do speak for themselves and can be attributed without provenance because right now, there is no reason to make illegitimate copies.

[manayunkman]

Provenance is not a story and things don't speak for themselves they have provenance.

 

Provenance is not for selling and not for buying though the by product of provenance can help a sale.

 

Why is a museum concerned with provenance ?

 

They aren't buying and selling.

 

Provenance has been important since ancient times.

 

Provenance tells you who and when something was made or it tells you who owned something.

 

If I'm the curator of a museum and some one offers to give something from somebody famous I want to make sure the lineage is there.

 

I want to make sure the item was made during that time by that manufacturer.

 

That's provenance.

 

This is no different than the art world.

 

Same people same problems and things need to be proved correct.

 

We are not a sophisticated as they are just yet.

 

I think as collectors we are concerned with how much or how little provenance you have.

 

Does your provenance take you past the manufacturing and date info ( which proves authenticity ) and into who owned it and used and maybe even where ?

 

When I buy a USMC K-BAR at the flea market and I know from all the signs that it is WWII those signs are provenance.

 

When the seller tells me some story that can't be substantiated all I have is a WWII K-Bar and that's all I'm paying for.

 

But when the scabbard is carved and you can tell it was done at the time, with the persons name which leads to a unit and then to places, each one of those steps ads to the provenance of ownership of the knife.

 

To a collector that excites me and I have an emotional connection to a thing because I know who it came from.

[cutiger83]

When I buy a USMC K-BAR at the flea market and I know from all the signs that it is WWII those signs are provenance.

 

 

Provenance has nothing to with whether or not an item is WWII vintage but is actually documentation or proof showing who originally owned/used the military item.

 

...Kat

[manayunkman]

Provenance is who made and who owned it.

[manayunkman]

I am going to suggest that, if you take the K-BAR example above, and could figure out where the steel was made and where the ore came from, that is also provenance.

 

And the hobby is going to get to that point as we continue to split hairs.

[manayunkman]

Is a certificate of authenticity provenance ?

[cutiger83]

I am going to suggest that, if you take the K-BAR example above, and could figure out where the steel was made and where the ore came from, that is also provenance.

 

And the hobby is going to get to that point as we continue to split hairs.

 

 

If knowing the manufacturer is provenance, then every single item with a maker's mark, label, etc has provenance.

 

I am sorry but you (not "we") are the one splitting hairs. I am not trying to be argumentative but I believe you are the only one in this entire thread that believes knowing a manufacturer is provenance.

 

...Kat

[RustyCanteen]

Provenance is who made and who owned it.

 

Maybe, it can depend in my opinion on other factors.

 

If one has a painting it doesn't matter who made the frame or the canvas if the artwork itself is questionable. At that point the value only lies in selling the frame. Likewise an unnamed K-Bar is only a K-Bar, and is worth only the sum of what we know it is and nothing more. Fake Stradivariuses have been around for a loooonng time, having one come out of a family who has owned it for over a hundred years doesn't mean a thing since it is fake. Since the attribution of manufacture is fake then it doesn't matter what it says, because it isn't what it is pretending to be.

 

On the other hand, if someone has a K-Bar named (personalized sheath) to someone who fought on Iwo Jima in 1945 then it is worth more in our hobby because of the implied association. However then the other factors come into play, did it start off as a loose sheath that was 'assembled' by mating it with a loose K-Bar? Is the naming legitimate? etc.

 

 

I am going to suggest that, if you take the K-BAR example above, and could figure out where the steel was made and where the ore came from, that is also provenance.

 

And the hobby is going to get to that point as we continue to split hairs.

 

I disagree that it would always be considered provenance. It is trivia, but it has no bearing on the journey of the item in the past 70 years. A real WWII K-Bar is a real WWII K-Bar, the question is how to prove it was truly carried by a specific person at a specific place during a specific time. If we know the object is real then good, but how do we know there is more to the story?

 

Is a certificate of authenticity provenance ?

 

It depends on the source, among other things.

 

I do agree that the hobby will split hairs on this, and no one will entirely agree with every point of view. There is no cookie cutter approach to answering these questions that would apply to every situation in life or the hobby, but that is why we all try to educate ourselves to better prepare for critical thinking when faced with such a decision.

[manayunkman]

It's important to define what provenance is so we can all be on the same page.

 

And thank you Kat for giving me credit for todays sophisticated and complex forensic techniques but it wasn't me.

 

To me an American helmet was an American helmet but now there are so many different ways that the straps were attached and dates to match certain weaves and this buckle was used then and and and ....someday we will say....the material for this strap came from this lamb in Oklahoma and are we splitting hairs yet ?

 

This is where the hobby is headed.

 

It's there already.

 

In the art world, which is so similar to our hobby, they can tell you where a certain paint came from and what plant it was made from and what woods in Holland the artist got the plant from !

 

That is provenance.

 

But only part of provenance.

 

Who owned it after it was made is also provenance.

[RustyCanteen]

I don't think everyone can be on the same page, because of the reason I mentioned; there are too many exceptions to the rule. The facts of the item in question must be examined individually, and not as a whole.

 

Here is a problem to illustrate some of the many potential issues confronting a collector:

 

A man stops you on the way into a show and claims he has an old pile of army uniforms in his trunk. What is his motivation? To sell, to make money. Do we believe he has the items? Probably.

 

He opens the trunk and it is chock full of items. It is clear everything is WWII. The man says it came from an estate, and that the owner was a WWII vet. So do we believe that or is he buttering us up?

 

Most of the items do not have a laundry mark or any identifying features. The man was an officer. So there is no way to be 100% certain that it is not an assembled grouping. The seller says that being an officer he didn't have to mark everything and that he was able to keep a lot. Obviously his statement means nothing, because it is neither provable to be true or false. It is a neutral answer, the same as stating that it might rain from a storm cloud.

 

The seller wants a fair sum of money for the entire grouping. You think it over as it is a fair price.

 

The seller remembers he has other goodies, a helmet and dress uniform; airborne stuff and drags them out of the back seat. Clearly a sales tactic. He now wants to sell the lot for the agreed price, but wants more for the helmet and uniform.

 

Do you apologize and excuse yourself from the potential transaction, or fumble for your wallet and hurry to complete the deal?

 

You may end up with a legit lot of unnamed items (no provenance beyond the trunk of the car), in which case we might attempt to verify the story by ascertaining how much of the story can be proved, since the entire story is plausible. And that is the real problem isn't it? It is plausible, but not really provable. We won't even speculate if the items are real in this theoretical exercise since that is not the objective of it, but what provenance is there to something in which you have to trust only what is said to you?

 

Likewise, someone offers you a captured German bayonet and a capture paper from 1945, along with a photo of the owner in Germany in 1945. Good provenance yes? The photo may have been purchased for $1 at a flea market, the capture paper from a grouping of assorted papers, and the bayonet a gun show find.

 

At some point, everyone will have to face their own conundrums with their own answers. Because everyone looks at things differently from another person, and there can be no standard way of proving what is merely implied. Some people may believe they won a barn found helmet, others may be entirely skeptical of such a claim. Who is to say which is right and which is wrong? Where is the proof or the provenance? Perhaps the barn was built in 1902, is that provenance? Surely then we can believe that part of the story is true, right? But what does that prove? Merely that is it plausible.

[aef1917]

It's important to define what provenance is so we can all be on the same page.

 

And thank you Kat for giving me credit for todays sophisticated and complex forensic techniques but it wasn't me.

 

To me an American helmet was an American helmet but now there are so many different ways that the straps were attached and dates to match certain weaves and this buckle was used then and and and ....someday we will say....the material for this strap came from this lamb in Oklahoma and are we splitting hairs yet ?

 

This is where the hobby is headed.

 

It's there already.

 

In the art world, which is so similar to our hobby, they can tell you where a certain paint came from and what plant it was made from and what woods in Holland the artist got the plant from !

 

That is provenance.

 

But only part of provenance.

 

Who owned it after it was made is also provenance.

 

Provenance is only who owned something and when.

 

Being able to tell where a certain paint came from is used to authenticate objects when there is no provenance, but it is not provenance.

[RustyCanteen]

 

Provenance is only who owned something and when.

 

Being able to tell where a certain paint came from is used to authenticate objects when there is no provenance, but it is not provenance.

 

I agree with this. But we will all look at the question our own way.

[manayunkman]

Provenance is not a story.

 

It's a series of facts that tell a story.

 

Based on facts.

 

Your scenario is a valid one.

 

What are the facts in your scenario ?

 

And are the facts concrete or circumstantial ?

 

It might be that the only facts are that the items are original.

 

You can tell they are original because of documented reasons of how it's made etc.

 

That's the only provenance you have.

 

The sellers story is unsubstantiated so it is not part of any facts and has no bearing on the provenance.

 

As far as faking provenance that is a whole different subject.

 

My main concern is that we all understand what provenance is.

 

It is the factual history of something.

 

Now after you buy it all the fact that it has gone through your hands is part of the objects provenance.

[aef1917]

since the other thread got locked.

 

The Met simply defines provenance as the ownership history.

 

http://www.metmuseum.org/research/provenance-research-project

 

This is what the Met has in the provenance section on its page for Claude Monet's Camille Monet on a Park Bench:

[bruno and Paul Cassirer, Berlin, until 1900; sold for approx. 10,000 marks to Arnhold]; Eduard Arnhold, Berlin (1900–d. 1925); his widow, Johanna Arnhold, née Arnthal, Berlin (1925–d. 1929); their daughter, Mrs. Carl (Elisabeth, called Else) Clewing, formerly Mrs. Erich Kuhnheim (widowed), Berlin (from 1929); Peter Gutzwiller, Basel (about 1947); [Knoedler, New York]; Edwin Vogel, New York; [sam Salz, New York, until 1955; sold to Ittleson]; Henry Ittleson Jr., New York (1955–d. 1973; sold by his heirs in 1974 to Acquavella); [Acquavella Galleries, New York, 1974; sold to Lefevre]; [Alex Reid & Lefevre, London, 1974; sold on September 2 to Annenberg]; Walter H. and Leonore Annenberg, Rancho Mirage, Calif. (1974–2002; jointly with MMA, 2002–his d. 2002)

 

http://www.metmuseum.org/Collections/search-the-collections/438003?rpp=20&pg=1&rndkey=20140107&ao=on&ft=*&deptids=52&pos=11

 

 

Note that there is nothing about whether Monet used zinc white or cremintz white or a sable or camel hair brush. It doesn't say anything about whether it is on canvas or a panel. Just who owned it and when.

[manayunkman]

There is a definition for provenance it is not a matter of opinion.

 

And if it is opinion then there is going to be a lot of confusion and BS down the road.

 

The problem with these threads right now is that opinion is confused with facts.

 

Or no one wants to substantiate the story with facts.

[RustyCanteen]

If the origin of the progression of ownership is unclear (who legally held title to the items on say, June 6th, 1944 and then afterward) then all you have are implied facts and a story. Not provenance.

[RustyCanteen]

since the other thread got locked.

 

The Met simply defines provenance as the ownership history.

 

http://www.metmuseum.org/research/provenance-research-project

 

This is what the Met has in the provenance section on its page for Claude Monet's Camille Monet on a Park Bench:

[bruno and Paul Cassirer, Berlin, until 1900; sold for approx. 10,000 marks to Arnhold]; Eduard Arnhold, Berlin (1900–d. 1925); his widow, Johanna Arnhold, née Arnthal, Berlin (1925–d. 1929); their daughter, Mrs. Carl (Elisabeth, called Else) Clewing, formerly Mrs. Erich Kuhnheim (widowed), Berlin (from 1929); Peter Gutzwiller, Basel (about 1947); [Knoedler, New York]; Edwin Vogel, New York; [sam Salz, New York, until 1955; sold to Ittleson]; Henry Ittleson Jr., New York (1955–d. 1973; sold by his heirs in 1974 to Acquavella); [Acquavella Galleries, New York, 1974; sold to Lefevre]; [Alex Reid & Lefevre, London, 1974; sold on September 2 to Annenberg]; Walter H. and Leonore Annenberg, Rancho Mirage, Calif. (1974–2002; jointly with MMA, 2002–his d. 2002)

 

http://www.metmuseum.org/Collections/search-the-collections/438003?rpp=20&pg=1&rndkey=20140107&ao=on&ft=*&deptids=52&pos=11

 

 

Note that there is nothing about whether Monet used zinc white or cremintz white or a sable or camel hair brush. It doesn't say anything about whether it is on canvas or a panel. Just who owned it and when.

 

 

Right, you posted while I was replying.

 

Provenance is essentially a paper-trail.

[JDK]

I think I see what you are saying Peter.

 

Are you suggesting we should use another word to describe associated items such as photographs of a item being worn or used, associated paperwork, etc.

 

"Sir, do you have any associated material proving that this is real" instead of calling it provenance. Is that what you are referring to or do I need to add some more Baileys to my coffee?

I admit to this extremely cold weather slowing down my brain a little the last few days!

 

JD

[manayunkman]

If the origin of the progression of ownership is unclear (who legally held title to the items on say, June 6th, 1944 and then afterward) then all you have are implied facts and a story. Not provenance.1000

 

 

1000% correct !

 

Implied facts are not facts.

 

Circumstantial evidence is not a fact but can help.

[manayunkman]

JD,

 

I'm saying before you can establish ownership or some kind of story you must establish if the item is legitimate and genuine first.

 

First step in provenance is establishing authenticity.

 

Now if you run into the Pletz group you don't have to think much about what is real.

 

You can establish it real because of years of experience and a head full of facts.

 

All these facts tell a story that is all part of the provenance.

 

Provenance is a series of facts that tell you the story of an item or a group of items.

 

It is the history of an item.

 

Where does history start ?

 

That seams to be where there are differences of opinion.

 

What is the definition of Provenance ?

[JDK]

Gotcha. I follow where you are going now. However, I'll add the Baileys anyhow!

 

JD