Quote:
Originally Posted by fernando
Like many (not to say all ) others ?
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by fernando
Like many (not to say all ) others ?
|
It is inevitable for all massive collections: pure statistics tells us that the
" 100% true hit" in virtually any population is confined to 95% of the data/items ( 2SD from the mean). Only collections dealing with 100% attributable, dated and marked items may look "better". Small museums and poor/uneducated staff are the two main " kisses of death".
Metropolitan Museum is meticulous, with specialist staff, widely published and thoroughly edited books is likely to be in the upper 1% of all museums. Morosini's collection was assembled in the very late 19- very early 20 centuries. At that time there were no internet auctions, and all acqusitions were conducted through a small number of highly reputable dealers just like the Stone's one. Thus, the number of mistakes was brought to a minimum. There were mistakes, most of which were corrected by subsequent research and claiming that the attribution of Met's items is " often" wrong is mistaken.