Sotheby’s Autumn Auction Preview

Sotheby’s are offering 194 lots of Fabergé, Imperial & Revolutionary Art in London on November 26. They only got around to posting their online catalogue in the second week of November, just three weeks before the sale. Serious auction houses usually plaster their PDF catalogues over the Net far earlier! As for a printed catalogue, forget it: the penny-pinching New Bond Street outfit stopped producing those yonks ago.

The tardy effort of Sotheby’s Russian Department is typical of their modus operandi these days, and can hardly help business (or encourage potential clients). A comparison with Heritage Auctions in Dallas is eloquent: not only did Heritage print and dispatch a well-researched catalogue for their December 16 Russian Sale way ahead of the auction – they had it online six weeks before the sale to boot. Heritage are keen to get the world to know about them. Sotheby’s blasé Russian Department seem to reckon they are so famous and important they don’t need to bother.

Embodying such arrogance is Sotheby’s magnificently titled International Head of Decorative Arts and Global Head of Fabergé & Russian Works of Art: Helen Culver-Smith. According to the firm’s website, Ms Culver-Smith is ‘a leader in her field’ who works ‘closely with private collectors internationally.’ Yeah, sure. She certainly doesn’t work closely with potential buyers, being far too important to even answer the phone. And I’m not talking out-of-office hours. I’ve called her between nine and five till I’m blue in the face but, every time, I have found Her Highness too busy to take my call.

*

A significant chunk of Sotheby’s November sale comes from the collection of a Russian lady who lives in Notting Hill Gate. She invited me to go and look at it a few months ago. First she wanted to sell it. Then, a few days later, she said nothing was for sale. And now she’s consigning the whole shebang to Sotheby’s…! They must have offered her an enticing guarantee. I made her an offer for various items, including plates from Nicholas I’s Military Service – very attractive and highly sought-after as rare Imperial Porcelain, even if we see them in every big sale (I guess hundreds if not thousands of gold-bordered Nicholas I Period plates were produced). Nine of her plates are appearing at Sotheby’s, with estimates of £25,000-35,000.

Another Nicholas I military plate, incidentally, is on offer at a 440-lot Russian sale to be held by Jackson’s in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, on November 20 – part of a major collection of Imperial Porcelain amassed over half a century by Raymond F. Piper, who aimed to acquire one items from every single Imperial service. Ray is getting on in years, and has no one to bequeath his superb collection to. The reserves are enticingly low and every piece should sell.

The highlight of Sotheby’s Russian Porcelain is a beautiful Nikolai I Imperial Porcelain vase, 75cm tall and fronted by a large painted panel reproducing the Oyster Eaters by Franz von Mieris (1659), acquired for the Hermitage in the late 1760s (Lot 218). I have no qualms about the £180,000-250,000 estimate, but I’m not convinced about the vase being dated to ‘circa 1848.’ That sounds a little late to me. And how can Sotheby’s be so relatively precise when the vase has a ‘rubbed illegible date’? We’re also told is ‘indistinctly marked in gilt’ with a ‘signature on the lip.’ What does ‘lip’ mean? If it means rim, why not say so? I once had vase of same size and design (perhaps they were a pair); I sold it to the husband of our collector from Notting Hill Gate in 2004. The panel was based on another (much later) work in the Hermitage, Artiste Peignant le Portrait d’une Musicienne (c.1800) by French artist Marguerite Gérard.

Another Imperial Porcelain highlight is an 1859 Baluster Vase, painted with a child portrait by Kirsanov; it is taller, at 103cm, but possesses less finesse (Lot 352, est. £150,000-200,000). Soviet porcelain includes Naum Kongiser’s Village Radio (1927), starring a bearded muzhik in incongruous headphones tuning in to the latest Communist gibberish, This has been granted a £50,000-70,000 estimate that looks ambitious, given that an identical version of the same piece fetched $54,400 (the equivalent of £43,000), against an estimate of just $15,000-25,000, at Doyle’s in New York on October 16. The underbidder at Doyle’s will be hoping his or her path is now clear to secure this beauty with less competition.

 

 

ICONS

The sale includes five porcelain Easter eggs and five early 20th century icons (estimates £10,000-20,000) that I offered to buy from my Notting Hillstress when she showed me her collection. I was given a price… then told nothing was for sale. So again a surprise to see them at Sotheby’s. The sale’s priciest icon, of different provenance, is predicted to be a Mother of God with silver-gilt and cloisonné enamel oklad by the Kurlyukov firm (Moscow, 1899-1908), estimate £50,000-70,000 (Lot 310).

 

PICTURES

Also from the same London collection come six lacklustre copies of famous portraits of late 18th century/early 19th century Russian bigwigs (estimates £5,000-30,000). In fact, none of the sale’s two dozen paintings are anything to write home about. A trio of Serebriakova pastel portraits, again from Notting Hill Gate (Lots 201-203), are each expected to bring around £50,000, while a typically small Pokhitonov (Lot 377), Château d’Anglet near Biarritz (1888), has an estimate of £40,000-60,000. There used to be two collectors competing like mad for Pokhitonov, and a picture like this would have commanded ten times the low-estimate published here. But two people do not create the market, and I fear those halcyon days are gone.

A dull, very dark Winter Landscape with Moscow in the distance is catalogued as ‘Russian School, 19th century’ – although it bears the ‘later’ (i.e. bogus) signature of Savrasov. How come it has been granted an estimate of £30,000-50,000 (Lot 383)? Maybe it’s a misprint – unsigned paintings hold scant interest to serious collectors.

 

FABERGÉ

 

A while back Sotheby’s approached me when they were looking for parasol handles to offer on consignment to a private client from The Gulf. Amongst the pieces I presented them was a jewelled, silver-mounted Hare’s Head carved from a salmon-pink stone, with garnet eyes and mounted on a cylindrical sleeve in gorgeous purple guilloché enamel: a beautiful piece, with the marks of Fabergé and workmaster Eduard Schramm. Sotheby’s took it on consignment for £58,000 – then contrived to break one of the Hare’s ears before they could show it to the potential client. Sotheby’s compensated me in full then, after gluing the ear back together, banged the hapless Hare in a sale on 30 November 2021, when – still attributed to Fabergé and Schramm – it fetched £18,900. Not a bad price for a damaged piece. But lo and behold! This self-same Hare is to be found in Sotheby’s upcoming sale on November 26 (Lot 246), with belated qualms expressed about its authenticity.

It is being offered without a reserve, with a paltry estimate of £3,000-5,000, and described as  ‘bearing spurious marks for Fabergé and Eduard Schramm’ and only ‘possibly’ made in St Petersburg (the salmon-pink stone – which I presume to be rhodonite – is catalogued as mere ‘agate’). What on earth is going on? Did their International Head of Decorative Arts (and Global Head of Fabergé & Russian Works of Art) screw up? Did she have a change of heart, and realize she had previously erred? How could such a misadventure befall an expert with such glorious and unimpeachable credentials as Helen Culver-Smith? Or did the new owner, after paying £18,900, come to the conclusion it was not by Fabergé and the (relatively obscure) Eduard Schramm…? But who could possibly dare challenge the opinion of Sotheby’s ‘leader in the field’? – Surely only a Very Important Client, irate at discovering a hareline crack in his parasol handle’s ear.

 

A handsome Fabergé silver and cobalt blue enamel circular Desk Clock by Perkhin (Lot 243) has an £18,000-25,000 estimate that sounds incredibly low to me given recent prices for Fabergé clocks (I need to take a look at the Condition Report). On the other hand, the £20,000-30,000 estimate for a gold-mounted bowenite Bud Vase (Lot 244), also by Perkhin, sounds awfully high for such a small, boring item (just 4 inches high). Plus I don’t like bowenite (which looks like soap). I can only presume that Sotheby’s are expecting the provenance to titillate bidders: the vase was once owned by British financier and philanthropist Sir Charles Clore (1904-79), after whom the Clore Gallery at Tate Britain (home to all those Turners) is named. Clore’s wide-ranging collection of Fabergé came up for auction in 1985.

A Fabergé silver neo-Rococo Mantel Clock (workmaster Hjalmar Armfelt, St Petersburg 1899-1908) looks absolutely fine, but I predict its £60,000 low estimate will be out of reach (Lot 232). Fabergé clocks are cherished and relished for the beauty of their guilloché enamel; a lump of silver like this is far less attractive.

 

A whimsical Fabergé trompe-l’œil Fruit Bowl (Moscow 1895), aping a lily pond with a cherubic figure trying to harpoon a dolphin, is another big hunk of silver. A shame there’s no glass liner – if the £30,000 low estimate corresponds to the reserve, I reckon it will flop (Lot 255). A boring, lacklustre silver-mounted Glass Decanter by Rappoport will also be pushed to reach its £15,000-25,000 estimate (Lot 257). We are blithely informed that Fabergé and the workmaster’s initials are ‘struck to the interior of the lid,’ yet Sotheby’s provide no photographic evidence of this – a gross dereliction of their duty to provide potential buyers with all the information required before deciding whether or not to bid.

 

FABERGÉ CREATURES

 

A silver and hardstone ink-well in the form of an Owl on a black hardstone base, made by the 1st Silver Artel (St Petersburg 1908-17) with eyes of cabochon moonstones, has little chance to fly away with a £40,000-60,000 estimate (Lot 226). But I suppose caviar lovers may be attracted to a Rappoport silver and hardstone Sturgeon (c.1890) on a rough cut hardstone base (Lot 227, est. £30,000-50,000).

 

Pigs and boar are not exactly the most attractive of animals, however tasty, especially when they come with honkingly optimistic estimates. Take the Rappoport silver bell-push in the form of a Grimacing Pig (1904-08), its nose set with a cabochon ruby push-piece (Lot 228, est. £20,000-30,000); or the matchstick holder in the form of a Wild Boar (Moscow 1894) with sandstone body, silver head and legs, and ruby eyes (Lot 229, est. £40,000-60,000).

A silver bell-push in the form of a Bear on its Back (Moscow 1899-1908), its left foot set with a cabochon ruby push-piece, is similar to one that appeared along with half-a-dozen silver animals at Christie’s some months ago, all priced at around £10,000… nowhere near the £30,000-50,000 Sotheby’s claim to be expecting here (Lot 230).

I wonder if the next lot – a parcel-gilt silver Dove doubling as a table box – is actually Russian, let alone Fabergé. Sotheby’s claim, without a shred of evidence, that it was ‘retailed by Fabergé, St Petersburg, circa 1890.’ To me the Fabergé mark looks dubious. So does the whole piece. We’re told it has a maker’s mark Cyrillic NS or IS… but  I don’t remember ever seeing the initials НС or ИС associated with Fabergé. To anyone building a collection I would never recommend acquiring it – as I would have told its previous owner, Swiss sculptress Amalia de Schulthess (1918-21). It may be a cute little (8-inch) birdie, but a £30,000-50,000 estimate is a hefty deterrent. Who on earth comes up with these Sotheby’s estimates? Surely not Helen Culver Smith – ‘a leader in her field’?

Sure, it’s hard to procure quality material in quantity these days. Auction firms are always on the look-out for great things from dealers and collectors – but great things are rare. To fill their sales auctioneers often lure clients to consign items at exaggerated values. Naturally, over-estimated items fail to sell. This muddles the market. Poor sale results are often reported in the media by journalists ill-equipped to render an educated opinion. Very high estimates, even if commensurate with market conditions, tend to deter clients; low estimates can breed ‘auction fever,’ resulting in prices far higher than expected. In most cases vendors (especially dealers) do not want to be exposed to the hit-or-miss chance of striking it rich – so many quality consignments are grossly overpriced… and stand little chance of selling (rapacious auction premiums of 25% or more don’t help either).

 

NOT FABERGÉ

The sale includes two silver-mounted onyx desk sets. Such sets are no longer collected, let alone used. To modern eyes they are a useless encumbrance. A writing set with double inkstand, two inkwells and other bits and bobs (Lot 297), ascribed to Vladimir Gordon (St Petersburg 1908-17), has a £5,000-7,000 estimate with which I quite agree, though I think potential takers will be few and far between. A ‘smoking compendium’ (Lot 298) made a couple of decades earlier by the more familiar Ovchinnikov – comprising stand, ashtray, matchbox holder and candle holder – has little or no chance against an estimate of £40,000-60,000. The discrepancy between the two estimates is bewildering.

 

Two silver items by Nikolai Tarabrov, who ran a Moscow workshop from 1890-1907, have been granted daunting estimates. A silver, gem-set, enamel and cut-glass Centrepiece, with an enamel side plaque after Solomko’s By the Fence, is touted at £100,000-150,000 (Lot 262). A silver Bratina (punch bowl), its en plein enamel cartouche with a detail from Viktor Vasnetsov’s Bogatyrs, comes with an estimate of £70,000-100,000 (Lot 263). Yet an almost identical bratina with a similar plaque will be available at Heritage (Dallas) on December 16… with an estimate of just $50,000-70,000 (equivalent to £40,000-55,000). And that’s not all! The Heritage bratina comes with its ladle, is slightly larger (25.7cm compared to Sotheby’s 23.5cm), and weighs 2.6kg; Sotheby’s have not bothered to indicate the weight of their bratina – or provide any information as to provenance. The Heritage bratina bears a German inscription Zum 22 Juli 1911 von August & Sonja, and was first sold at auction in Saxony in 2005 (whether or not by descendants of the original recipients is not stated).

I’ll be previewing the Heritage sale shortly in a separate article. They and Sotheby’s appear to be living in different worlds.

CHRISTIE’S KIWI

Christie’s so-called Exceptional Sale in Paris on November 20 runs to just  38 lots – one of them by Fabergé: a grey agate Kiwi by Wigström (1910/11) with diamond eyes and gold legs and beak (Lot 24, est. €70,000-90,000) that resurfaced at Bernhard Magaliff Antikviteter in Stockholm in the 1970s. The goldsmith’s marks under the feet include a rare one used only from late 1910 through March 1911, exclusively for Fabergé items made in Russia for sale in London.

Over 200 hardstone creatures were sold in Fabergé’s London store from 1906-16, one-third of them birds – including a Kiwi in brown agate bought by Neil Primrose (son of former Prime Minister Lord Rosebery) in 1908 and now in the Royal Collection.

The Kiwi, in case you were wondering, was adopted as the unofficial emblem of New Zealand in 1904.