Quote:
Originally Posted by David Atkatz
It has absolutely nothing to do with Peter Nash's website.
We've known for years that those Mathewson bookplates are secretarial.
And Spence knows it, too:
"1910 book plates adhered to the inside front covers of Won in the Ninth have recently come under scrutiny for their controversial legitimacy. These number(ed) (appr. 500) presentational copies have a type written name added with a large and spurious secretarial black fountain pen manuscript. Observe the low initial stroke of the “M” and the oversized lower case letters and the unusual “t-h” combination that is heavily retraced. Overall, this vintage ghost signed anomaly is far more pointed than his other versions….”
|
I believe Nash when he says that Spence said that some he had authenticated were secretarial. I am most definitely NOT a Matthewson autograph expert. I studied them for a while when I was looking to purchase one, particularly checks. I also looked at as many bookplate examples as I could find, because I found the 'secretarial' discussions and felt like it was a great opportunity to learn more.
In the end, I did not feel comfortable buying a book or a baseball. And curiously, I also did not feel comfortable buying a check. Here's why: go look at the third bookplate example Nash provides. Then go look at a few Matthewson signed checks. What I 'found' was that at least two different people signed the books. Was one of them Matthewson? I don't know, but if all the bookplates were secretarial-signed, there were two secretaries and one of them also signed some of Matthewson's checks.
That's my conclusion. If I'm wrong, sobeit, but my research left me uncomfortable forking over $5k+ for a Matty autograph.