 |
| . |
Some people never learn, you can tell 'em and its like water off a duck's back. So Matt Beall, having set his pal Luke Caverns on me for discussing his fantasies about his "perfectly-round-might-be-lost-technology"..."ancient Egyptian stone vase" has just published another - er, another "perfectly-round-might-be-lost-technology"..."ancient Egyptian stone vase". And just to stave off any criticisms, and show why he is so confident that this is a real ancient vase... he shows the piece of paper. At the top it has the dealer's name. My ears prick up. It is a known name. There is a thread on this business on a collectors' forum I presume Mr Beall will have come across researching his artefact. I've written about them twice: "Emptor, Caveat and Do Your Homework"
Saturday 23 April 2022, and
"A Lady and her Scarab" Thursday 14 April 2022.
But let's look at the claimed collection history: there are three families named - but I have not found any other reference to their collections. Then it's a "French family" and "inherited" within that unnamed family, and then the new owner IS named.
Where it was before "1962" is not given. Mr Beall's belief that this piece of paper authenticates this object relies on the belief that in 1962 there were no lathes in stonemasons' yards that could turn a stone object. Yeah, right. Get a vase from a proper archaeological contet Mr Beall, not off the market. What there is not to understand?
But let's look at the claimed collection history: there are three families named - but I have not found any other reference to their collections. Then it's a "French family" and "inherited" within that unnamed family, and then the new owner IS named.
Where it was before "1962" is not given. Mr Beall's belief that this piece of paper authenticates this object relies on the belief that in 1962 there were no lathes in stonemasons' yards that could turn a stone object. Yeah, right. Get a vase from a proper archaeological contet Mr Beall, not off the market. What there is not to understand?
UPDATE 25.05.2024
Antiquities buyer Matt Beall who yesterday was claiming he was posting stuff on social media about the vases he bought in order to "share" and learn what people think seems not to be interested in learning what happens when archaeologists get shown a dodgy artefact with inadequate documentation. So now hwe's blocked me. To what extent is any of this "alt.archaeology" stuff a real intellectual curiosity and desire to learn (and cvontribute) and how much is it attention-seeking (look-at-me-what-I've-got/what-controversial-thing-I-said) clickbait? I suspect a lot of the latter.
No comments:
Post a Comment