Viking silver pendant
Hi esteemed group. I am interested in buying this pendant for my daughter's birthday. It is being sold by artemission. Does it look genuine to any experts here? I have no knowledge of these kinds of things. Thanks
The "experts" reacted by showing a (single photo of a) totally different type of pendant that it was claimed was authentic, because the seller is a "very friendly man and extremely knowledgeable expert. I'll not comment on that second item beyond saying typologically that item is problematic and in terms of the surface condition... IMO it's a caveat emptor.
As for Jani's lunula, because that's what this is, I am not at all a big fan of Artemission for a number of reasons.
The type is not specifically "Viking" (but "Viking" sells well) but part of a horizon of silver items that occur singly and in hoards across a wide area of central and eastern Europe (with outliers in Scandinavia) going down the Volga in the central Asian area. My colleague Władek Duczko knows more than me about that. So not "Viking".
But as lot of the ones on the market would have the granules cast - some are authentic ancient, the bulk are not. But this one is actual granulation. Somebody's put a lot of work into this one (and it IS a lot if you know the technique - look it up). That's a plus.
Typologically and stylistically it is OK. That's not a negative (its not a plus, as a copy could be a slavish copy, but there is nothing here about the type or - more importantly - style to raise an issue). [caveat, the granules might be a little on the large side and suspiciously even]
There are no pockets of pitting where two metals with different potential were in contact in the ground. No visible corrosion in the undercuts and recesses. So if it was there, it's been totally stripped out by harsh (electro-?)chemical methods. Or perhaps it was not there. That's a minus.
Its very shiny, but typically silver objects on the antiquities market tend to be - patina is not valued on silver or gold, they have to shine. Even if an already chemically-stripped object has tarnished from lying in a drawer untouched since the 1990s, dunking it in all sorts of nasty stuff will bring the shine back in a few seconds. So, not a minus (though I think collectors should value patinated ancient silver more).
On the back you can see the metal structure has been altered by the granules on the other side and something has lightly etched out those differences. That might be a plus - see above.
The loop and edges of the object show wear and damage. This could be artificial 'distressing', but doers look convincingly done/convincing. A plus. There is a "Westminster" group of really well-constructed fakes of early Medieval metalwork going round at the moment [seller: you KNOW who you are...] that tick all the boxes, but fall down on this one. The first ones were better but now they are getting sloppy. On stylistic grounds, I do not think this is a "Westminster" fake.
There is ZERO mention of any documentation of legal excavation (number of permit, landowner permission etc) or legal acquisition (most countries in the region have legislation vesting ownership of archaeological items like this in the state) or legal export (most countries in the region restrict this, there should be an export licence). No mention of any documentation explicitly clarifying the legal situation is a HUGE MINUS.
I would like this to be a fake, but this one ticks too many boxes. I think if the lady from the Australian educational institute wants to contribute to the looting of the European archaeology heritage ("acquired in 1990s from an East European collection" apart from being orientalist, is NOT a provenance legitimating this item), she'd have what she's looking for. But personally 700USD could be better spent than on financing the looters and smugglers and the dodgy dealers (I think I know where this was obtained) that rip up Europe's past so some doting mum can 'give that special gift' [oh and it might well have been obtained by grave-robbing, nice, eh?].
So, as always, caveat emptor. This one looks authentic... but has a highly shaky legal situation.
I'd write this for Jani over there, but I am banned from using the AncientArtifacts forum. Their loss.
No comments:
Post a Comment