An Anglo-Saxon cross which was one of the stars of the Grosvenor House fair has now been dismissed as a modern fake. Bond Street gallery Rupert Wace sold the carved cross shaft to an American dealer for over $500,000 (£314,690), and he in turn is currently selling it on to a US museum. The cross therefore required a UK export licence, and it was then that specialists questioned its authenticity. In what has turned out to be an extraordinary case, the Export Reviewing Committee concluded early in December that it dated from the early 20th century.
Although there were six vetters of antiquities at Grosvenor House, they covered a wide range of objects and Richard Falkiner was the main adjudicator to have examined the Anglo-Saxon cross. Last month he told The Art Newspaper that he had seen “no reason to question it at the time and had every confidence in the dealer.”
The carved cross shaft had first “emerged” on 16 November 2001 at a local auction held by T.W. Gaze and Son, in the small farming town of Diss, in Norfolk. It was hardly the sort of sale where one would expect to see an important antiquity—the cross was apparently sold between lots comprising tractor spares and copper piping. The cross had been placed in the sale by Mel Glazer, who ran the local Pulham Garden Centre. Mr Glazer is believed to have acquired it in the mid 1990s in the Staffordshire village of Gailey.
Estimated at £100-150 ($159-238), the cross was simply described as a “4 ft stone monolith carved on all sides with Celtic decoration”. However, news got around that it might be something special, and at the sale there was even bidding from a European dealer. The cross was knocked down at £7,500 ($11,920)—a substantial sum for a modern fake, but a bargain for an Anglo-Saxon original.
The buyer of the “sleeper” was Rupert Wace Ancient Art, one of London’s leading antiquities dealers, who then conducted a more detailed examination. They concluded that the cross was an original, dating from the late eighth or early ninth century.
News reached Mr Glazer that the cross from his garden centre was on offer for “a substantial six-figure sum”. He then contacted his solicitor with a view to suing the auctioneer for failing to recognise it as an original. T.W. Gaze, which had sought expert advice on the cross at the time, insists that it had followed the correct procedures. However, Mr Glazer’s legal case against the local auctioneer over the unrecognised antiquity appears to be still ongoing.
Rupert Wace then arranged a sale to an American dealer, who had found a US museum which wanted the rare Anglo-Saxon cross shaft. The price has not been disclosed, but is believed to be over $500,000 (£314,690). A UK export licence application was therefore made, and the Export Reviewing Committee went through their normal procedure of calling in an independent assessor.
Although the outside assessor on the cross has not been named, for an antiquity of this sort one would normally expect the specialist to come from the British Museum. In this particular case, it also happens that one of the eight members of the Reviewing Committee, Professor Rosemary Cramp of Durham University, is the leading scholar in the field and is editor of the Corpus of Anglo-Saxon Stone Sculpture. Professor Cramp confirmed to The Art Newspaper that she believes the Wace cross is not authentic. “The style of the carving is not Anglo-Saxon,” she explained. Although all but one of the nine decorated panels are quite satisfactory as designs, the technique of the carving is not quite “right”. She believes it is 19th-century or early 20th-century. This view is shared by other Anglo-Saxon scholars who have examined the cross.
Mr Wace still believes the cross is Anglo-Saxon. “A great deal of further research has been done, including scientific research, which supports the belief that it is genuine.” For instance, traces of paint have been found, which is consistent with an original. Grosvenor House adjudicator Mr Falkiner also still believes that that there is nothing wrong with the cross.”
The object still remains something of a puzzle. One theoretical possibility is that it is an original which has been “cleaned up with a chisel” in modern times. Anglo-Saxon crosses are rare, but although some features of the Wace item are not consistent with an original, it is also rather different from most Victorian replicas.
The Export Reviewing Committee, having been advised that the cross was not Anglo-Saxon, suggested to Mr Wace that he should amend his application to describe the object as modern. Mr Wace responded that he was willing to do so on the licence form, although the accompanying description on the invoice still stated it was “Anglo-Saxon”. This seemed unsatisfactory to the committee, which suggested that Mr Wace should change the invoice to “early 20th century”.
The committee also proposed to Mr Wace that the price on the application should be reduced. However, under UK export regulations, “elements forming an integral part of artistic, historical or religious monuments which have been dismembered” and which are worth over £39,600 ($62,920) require a licence. Any figure above this level might therefore still have led to a licence deferral (providing it met the Waverley Criteria), allowing UK museums to match the price. Mr Wace pointed out that he had a firm sale for the higher price, subject to a licence being issued, so he could hardly alter this detail of his invoice.
Although the case still remains confidential from the point of view of the Export Reviewing Committee, the applicant is free to discuss it, and he has told us that a licence for an “early 20th century” cross was finally issued in early December. Accompanying it was a covering letter from the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, saying that “the granting of this export licence does not constitute an endorsement of the value”.Mr Wace was expecting that the cross would have been shipped to America by the end of last month. He is still confident that the sale to the US museum will go ahead and his terms of business state that “the authenticity of all our objects is guaranteed.”
Originally appeared in The Art Newspaper as: Export Reviewing Committee declares cross a fake
Export Reviewing Committee declares cross a fake