|
Post by trehopr1 on Jan 22, 2016 16:23:00 GMT
If the Allyn Museum of Entomology in Sarasota did win the bid on those 2 lots of Cymothoe; than it is safe to presume that they are now a part of the McGuire Center for Lepidoptera. All specimens that were once part of the Allyn Museum as well as the University of Florida collections were absorbed into the McGuire Center.
|
|
|
Post by trehopr1 on Jan 22, 2016 21:54:17 GMT
Smart specimen#1 (from his book) and in the collection of a friend in Wisconsin.
|
|
|
Post by trehopr1 on Jan 22, 2016 21:57:45 GMT
Smart specimen #2 (from his book) in same collection in Wisconsin.
|
|
|
Post by trehopr1 on Jan 22, 2016 22:02:23 GMT
Smart specimen #3 (from his book) in same collection in Wisconsin.
All three were acquired in early 1987.
Enjoy....
|
|
jhyatt
Aurelian
Posts: 224
Country: U.S.A.
|
Post by jhyatt on Jan 22, 2016 22:10:22 GMT
Some of the confusion about the auction date may stem from the fact that there were actually two auctions: One by Christie's in 1982 (just butterflies) and a much bigger sale (house, contents, and leps) in 83, by Sotheby. The '82 sale was a flop- few few lots attracted bidders, although Glasgow Museum got some material at this time, as I recall. The "real" sale was '83, when everything sold, generally for very high prices.
These events are all carefully detailed in the Tennent paper I referenced earlier.
|
|
|
Post by nomad on Jan 23, 2016 10:10:26 GMT
Having just read the Tennent's paper with kind thanks to Adam, I can enlighten others here to the activities of Paul Smart at the Saruman Museum, which have been me been referred to in another thread.
It seems that many but not all of Smart's types, especially his paratype were fabrications to add importance to his museum but mainly to gain a higher price at auction. Among these types, Smart said he had many paratypes of Delias but these are thought to be imitations, some Delias types he claimed to have been caught by the Pratts and Meek and were from the Rothschild or Joicey collection, were found to be when examined by Tennent at the Florida Museum were set low down on English pins or on the wrong type of modern long pin and often had different data to the genuine specimens. Rothschild and Jordan always used a certain make of continental pins and set their specimens high up. Other investigations by Tennent proved that other species in the Smart collection could not have been paratypes. Clearly, Tennent wanted to talk to Paul Smart but he vanished after the sale and his whereabouts are unknown.
It is said that Smart renamed the Saruman Museum, the National Butterfly Collection, to give the false impression of some sort of official status, so that potential donors might consider leaving their collections to this commercial and private establishment.
The paper also mentions what happened to his British Butterfly collection that is known to contain many genuine historic and extreme aberrations. The Gurney cabinet with some 2,500 specimens was bought by Sir John Kennaway, for the huge sum of £10,000. It was later acquired by Robert Gooden, a dealer in charge of Worldwide Butterflies, who then dispersed it to the four winds.
It appears that the late large Sandy Burgess collection was loaned to Smart and his Saruman Museum, was also sold at auction, which Tennant said according to Chris Samson caused some distress to the Burgess family.
Tennent, a professional entomologist at the BMNH was able through his extensive network, to trace the whereabouts of most of the important lots containing the supposed types sold at the auction but the destination of some, sold in other lots, remains unknown. Tennent found out that Smart had named his museum ' Saruman ' after the character in Lord of the Rings, "The White Wizard."
|
|
|
Post by bobw on Jan 23, 2016 11:05:29 GMT
Thanks Peter
I wasn't aware of this paper until John Hyatt mentioned it, I was going to ask John Tennent for a copy but I've not seen him at the museum since before Christmas so I guess he must be in PNG.
So now we certainly have evidence of Paul's "nefarious activities", as claimed by John Hyatt. Falsely claiming a specimen to be a type can cause all sorts of confusion to subsequent researchers, and selling material on loan is despicable.
I tried to scan some pages from the auction catalogue yesterday but each page produced a 2mb pdf file, which is too large to post here. I'll try to photograph some pages instead but I probably won't have time before Monday.
Bob
|
|
|
Post by nomad on Jan 23, 2016 11:44:09 GMT
Hi Bob, let me know if you would like a copy of Tennent's paper as a pdf .
|
|
|
Post by Paul K on Jan 23, 2016 12:19:55 GMT
Sauron Museum would be more appropriate name
|
|
|
Post by wollastoni on Jan 23, 2016 14:32:33 GMT
Interesting and funny article. It is Paul Smart's book which triggers my passion for tropical leps when I was a kid 5(I received it as a birthday present from my late grandmother). The plates and the historic parts of the book are fascinating.
He seems to be a strange fellow though. BTW not sure I remember well but Saruman was a treator in the Lord of the Rings.
|
|
|
Post by Paul K on Jan 23, 2016 15:21:24 GMT
Interesting and funny article. It is Paul Smart's book which triggers my passion for tropical leps when I was a kid 5(I received it as a birthday present from my late grandmother). The plates and the historic parts of the book are fascinating. He seems to be a strange fellow though. BTW not sure I remember well but Saruman was a treator in the Lord of the Rings. Olivier, I think you mean 'traitor'. Yes, Saruman was a traitor. Paul
|
|
|
Post by nomad on Jan 23, 2016 17:04:57 GMT
Seeing as the white wizard Saruman, who turned against his order to the evil side, was a strange choice for a name for a museum but it does have a certain ring to it. I guess Gandalf's Museum might have provoked a certain amount of laughter and attracted the wrong sort of visitors. However, if Smart was a fan of Lord of the Rings as I am, he had a wide choice of characters to choose from. Olivier is quite right, whatever Smart did, his book was responsible for many becoming interested in this great hobby in the first place.
|
|
|
Post by trehopr1 on Jan 23, 2016 18:56:47 GMT
My this thread has certainly turned out to be one full of intrigue ! I too feel that Smart's book was his greatest legacy from a lifetime spent pursuing a boyhood passion. He certainly comes across as a man of contrasts. As to his possible tax issues it can only be said --- it happens. Living the big life is not without risk. Heck, the actor Nicholas Cage was at the top of his game / career when his world crumbled down around him. He lost everything and now Hollywood has moved on. It is somewhat disturbing to hear of this (on loan) Burgess collection inadvertently falling prey as well to dissolution of the estate. I'm surprised that didn't wind up in a lawsuit. On the other hand, if proper paperwork of some nature legally identifying the collection as a loan was not procured --- and all was done by a handshake or verbal agreement than one can understand how easily it could be lost. It is even possible Paul may have left all these affairs in the hands of his wife or lawyers.
|
|
|
Post by barry2468 on Jan 25, 2016 10:42:11 GMT
26th. & 27th. October
1983 !!!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 25, 2016 12:28:27 GMT
False information of data is one of the biggest cancers in the hobby and there is no excuse for it. Usually it is done either as a quest for fame but more often pure and simply for monetary gain. It seems to be just as prevalent today as it always has been, I don't know if there will ever be a way to put a stop to it but we can control how accurate our data is. When buying material that others have collected we are at the mercy of others to provide accurate and extensive data, alas many dealers have no interest in this as they only see £ signs but true collectors should see data as just as important if not more important than the specimen itself. As far as Smarts falsification is concerned, again out of the need for kudos or just pure greed I can only say from my dealings as a young man I found him aloof and pompous but Mr Samson was the opposite.
|
|