FMF - Friends of Minerals Forum, discussion and message board

[Tracy]

...This post has been brewing in my mind for about 6 months, and 2 weeks ago I finally had time to put it in writing. And today I am able to post it. It's editorial-like but I'm hoping you will find it interesting, and that it will spark some conversation.

- Tracy

***

I am trying to understand the importance placed on the provenance of a specimen. In truth I find the concept baffling and frustrating. Personally, I value a mineral for what it is, and less for where it has “travelled.” And yet, the phenomenon of touting a specimen’s history, and using this information to inflate a specimen’s value, appears to be gaining in popularity.

It has become common on seller websites and FMF postings to read that an item is “from the ABC collection.” I wonder, is a specimen made better by the fact that it once belonged to ABC, and should I be paying more for it because of its former owner? With the exception of highly revered, great names in mineralogical history, who is ABC anyway? More often than not, I have no idea. It suggests that a key part of my mineral education is to learn about the names, attributes and stories of every collector on the planet, both living and dead. I doubt I’ll ever achieve that.

If the fact that a specimen belonged to ABC is pertinent, some context of why this information adds value should, at the very least, be included in the listing. What does it mean to collectors like me to obtain an ABC specimen? What if ABC is highly renowned, but had collecting interests completely different from mine? What if we have completely different tastes? And why did ABC, however great he or she is, decide to part with the specimen I'm viewing?

Provenance can be meaningful on a sentimental level. Consider a specimen which was formerly in the hands of one collector or dealer who sold/traded it to another and then got it back years later. I think this is a nice story for the people involved. However, to me, as an outsider, it is just a story. It doesn’t affect me, and isn’t even all that interesting without a personal connection. It has been suggested that knowing the provenance can help you learn about the dealers ABC liked to do business with, and where he or she travelled in search of specimens. Does this mean anything to me, though? Not really.

When I consider whether or not to buy a specimen, what matters most to me is the piece’s condition, the quality of the crystals, the esthetics, and the price. Provenance is only a consideration if I know enough about the former owner to recognize his or her eye for quality.

I understand that not everyone feels as I do about provenance and would welcome other FMFers’ thoughts on this topic.

***

[keldjarn]

[chris]

Hello Tracy,

Interesting editorial. To answer your request, the notoriety of the previous owner of a specimen I'm interested in is not my first criteria. Like you, I'll rely on condition, interest, price... Many mineral specimens belonged to other collectors (known or anonymous like me) before being passed from collection to collection. And even if I have a few of them coming from well known collectors I do not make the point at mentioning it, neither on FMF nor at home when showing my collection. However when such specimen comes to my collection, I keep a record of it. If one day I want to pass it to someone else, this person will be free to keep recording it or to just forget about it.

Would I accept to spend more money because of the notoriety of its previous owner ? Certainly not.

Cheers

Christophe

[John Nash]

I think of myself as a curator of my specimens; the provenance is part of the specimen. I don't pay much more for a specimen "just" because it is from a well-known collector, although perhaps I do for someone who's acquaintance I've enjoyed.

On a more subjective note, I value a specimen that has been through many collections even if I don't know the collectors, simply because it makes me think of and appreciate past people who handled and cared enough to carefully preserve the beautiful mineral specimen. This is particularly true when the labels go back into previous centuries; I have a few from the mid-19th century. The labels also remind one of mines that are long gone, and whole cultures that are long gone. I remind my fellow collectors that the only way that happens is if they faithfully preserve the provenance when possible. I also enjoy the aspect of mineral collecting involving "deep time," knowing something about how and when the specimen I hold was formed adds dimensionality; the provenance provides a related dimension in the much shorter time scales of human interests and lives.

I have some cubic aqua fluorite from an onshore silver mine, the Shuniah in Thunder Bay, Ontario. Does it matter that my then 13 y.o. son Greg found it on the main dump of the deepest shaft (#3) in 1999? Maybe to some? Imagine having a label from the 1800's stating who found your "Bigrigg" calcite, when it was found and which pit it actually cam from? Maybe interesting enough to pay a little extra?

John

[Jesse Fisher]

Humans are social animals and social interaction plays a large part in the reasons many people collect minerals (or anything else, for that matter). I think it is safe to assume that there are a lot of mineral collectors who have little or no background in the science of mineralogy, and that these people collect for reasons other than purely scientific curiosity. I'm not a psychologist, but I think it obvious that many collectors are ego-driven to varying extents and that friendly (and sometimes not so friendly) competition is well established among the collector community. If someone owns a specimen that came from someone who has been recognized by the community as a having a high-quality collection, then this adds a certain amount of social credibility to the new owner This can seem to add credibility to the specimen, particularly if the new owner is still enough of a novice at collecting that he/she has not yet firmly established their own sense of aesthetics and a comfortable understanding of what they want in their collection. In other words, it confers a certain amount of "bragging rights" because the specimen has been validated by having been owned by an acknowledged expert collector.

Personally, I think that knowing the history of a specimen - particularly one that has been out of the ground for some time - adds a certain intellectual value to the piece. For me, it doesn't necessarily add a great deal of monetary value unless the former owner was a person or institution of historical importance. To this end, I have on occasion acquired some rather mediocre specimens that I otherwise might have passed on simply because they came with an Arthur Russell label.

[Roger Warin]

Hi ,
Yes this is an interesting topic . As a label with a high price always causes a stir (which may be repulsive) , the dealer can use this trick to attract the attention of people.
Further, referring to a former owner may be appropriate, especially in the case of rare minerals. Even museums are using this medium. Thus in Ste Marie, I photographed a stephanite belonging to Hauy, the great scinentist , the father of crystallography. But the specimen was small, dark, but it was remarkable for the species. Hauy knew that, and he reminded me in June 2013.
Of course, all collectors are not called Rene Just Haüy. But sometimes having shown their collection, they have gained notoriety.
As a result, I like to know the past of a classic old mineral. Many people also collect the various labels that have characterized the mineral.
We can make this comparison. Drinking an old and famous wine gives in principle different taste from that provided by a too acidic and industrial Beaujolais Nouveau often without taste other than cherry.
But we must not fall into the trap away and invent wacky origins. Most minerals are not accompanied by such information. Today, there are more as collections change hands by rotating the generations.
Roger.

[Jordi Fabre]

[Don Lum]

Jordi wrote: "Another word is: with the label you get not only the specimen but probably also a lot of effort and time invested by the former owner to select the specimen."

I agree with you, Jordi. this may be true for those collectors who are new to the market and relatively unsophisticated like I am, who thinks "if this was worthy to be in so-and-so's collection, maybe I should consider it for my collection." I know everyone's tastes differ. Perhaps a dealer just acquired the piece by buying out another collection. However, I also agree with the point of view that paying more for a specimen because of the provenance is not particularly appealing.

[Don Lum]

I would also add that I wouldn't mind having Tracy look over my shoulder at a mineral show and tell me what she likes and why. That would be really helpful.

Don

[alfredo]

I agree with all of Tracy's original post; well said, Tracy!

With regard to Don's comment, "if this was worthy to be in so-and-so's collection, maybe I should consider it for my collection." - Yes, I agree, in cases where the original owner has died and their heirs are distributing the collection. But if the original owner is still alive, I get the opposite feeling, it makes me wonder, "Why are they getting rid of that? Did they just find out that much better ones are available elsewhere? Do I really want something that wasn't good enough for them to keep?" Of course people might have many reasons for selling something, they might just be economically distressed, or trying to concentrate on a narrower field. But I still get the feeling, buying something out of the personal collection of a living person, that I'm getting a castoff, like used clothes. Not so for buying something from a deceased collector.

[newryqs]

I remember the old Min Rec ad about "old collections" assembled to order. There are a large number of old labels floating about in collections for which there is no specimen. I have blank labels I've acquired over the years going back to Charles Upham Shepard, as well as from other famous collectors, dealers, and museums. I have even more old labels that are written or typed and that are from famous and not so famous sources. False provenance is rather easily created at times. About the only way you can be sure of provenance is if it were historically illustrated and attributed. Otherwise, it's like having a rare mineral that was "analyzed", but you do not have the documents. Even then, there are several anecdotes of people perpetuating a fraud by having a genuine rare mineral tested from an insignificant crumb and then the documents are "married" to a specimen that was not that species. A fraudulent jalpaite specimen that had documents attached to a chalcocite crystal specimen come to mind. The receiver of the fraudulent jalpaite immediately had the specimen re-tested and discovered the fraud. As the purchase price was $25,000 and was paid nearly 30 years ago when that was a lot of money, the owner wished to verify the" provenance" of the identification. Getting a specimen directly from the person who labeled it is also a way to be sure of provenance. After that, it's a lottery. There's frequently an uproar among mineral collectors when a widespread fraud is detected, but fraud is possibly less common than in other collectibles.

[Jim Robison]

I agree with most of what Tracy said so clearly. Provenance for current living collectors doesn't do a lot for me. Same with a lot of old collections. But there are a couple of exceptions.

The first is when I know a current collector specializes in the same localities and minerals I collect. The fact that the pieces previously made the cut, so to speak, and as noted above, helps me sort out possible acquisitions. And it does not bother me to know that somebody has set aside a piece from their collection. Objectives change over time for most collectors, financial considerations arise, and it can frequently happen that very nice specimens come out of current collections.

I collect Smithsonite from Tsumeb. In the collection are two pieces from the disbursement of the Philadelphia Academy minerals some years back. Both of these specimens have been now traced through the historic collection inventory logs to the Tsumeb mineral collecting efforts of the fairly well known (at least among Tsumeb collectors) Sam Gordon in 1929-1930 in a six-month long expedition to South America and Africa. Clearly dating the timing of these pieces gives clues to their original location in the mine. The fact that they caught the attention of Gordon is significant to me. Does the origin affect the value of the pieces. Likely not much in a monetary sense I am sure, although some dealers would disagree. Does it make the pieces more valuable and interesting to me, most definitely.

Other specimens in the collection with old labels and history also do much to tie down the mine area the rocks came out of. This helps me understand a little better the mineralogy of this fascinating mine.

[Jordi Fabre]

[Tracy]

[alfredo]

And I am honored to have one from you in my collection too, Jordi - a japanese native tellurium, if I remember right. But you and I are dealers; we're "expected" to sell our stones; people get pissed off at us if we don't sell them.

Not the same feeling as a private collector selling a piece; but I do see your point - It's nice to have old labels from friends and people we respect. It increases the sentimental value of the specimen, although I still agree with all those above who stated that it does nothing for the economic value of a stone.