I usually do not post about auctions but in this case I feel the need to. I feel strongly about samplers and their central role in interpreting woman’s history. So imagine my horror in finding out that the Burlington County Historical Society has decided to auction it’s important collection of samplers on November 20th.
At first, I was unsure about it and was wary to post. Museums do deaccession pieces from time to time, especially historical societies where all matter of bits are often dropped. I spoke with Jill Hall at a conference for curators in May and there was a section on deaccession policy and procedures. Often museums just don’t have the space to keep everything they have and often collecting philosophies in the early days of the institution was to “take anything”. Certainly I understand that this can lead to warehouses of material that is never cataloged or exhibited. It was with great interest that I learned about the process. Examining objects and searching the collection for information that could give it more provenance to determine if it fits the museum collection mission. Triple checklists with advisory boards. Checking with experts in the object type on its importance to the field. Do we have multiple examples? Is there any provenance for this object for this area? Working with other museums to see if the object matches their collection better and doing a museum-to-museum transfer. The process is long and arduous when done well so that mistakes are not made. I have been working with a museum who had done this process on their sampler collection years ago, deaccessioning samplers that were English and not made in the USA. But only those that were absolutely identifiable as such. They still have many in the collection that might be and didn’t take the risk.
So imagine my horor to find out from curators in the field that the collection at Burlington County Historical Society (shown on their site) was being auctioned off at Freeman’s Auction House for the following stated purpose (taken from page 57 of the auction catalog):
“The Burlington Country Historical Society has re-focused its mission of telling the rich history of the County to children and their families through new interactive exhibits. The sale proceeds of the needlework and furniture from the Society’s collection will be used to develop these participatory exhibitions and interpret the significant roles of transportation, agriculture, the military and Underground Railroad in the development of Burlington Country, New Jersey.”
Excuse me. What about women’s history? APPALLING
So then I did a bit more digging. Were these pieces something that they were working with at the museum or were they the leftovers that had been in storage for decades? Well a quick check of their website showed that many examples were not only pictured there – but were obviously mounted on display. The very pieces that were up for auction, including the piece that I will discuss that has been stolen in this process. Were these almost 30 pieces part of Burlington County? Were they significant samplers? Signed and dated and therefore possibly traceable? Is the society keeping the choice ones home? I don’t have the answers to all those questions, but several of them are Burlington County pieces. And they deemed the important enough to have had them on display at the museum. On top of that, several have been gifted to the Historical Society in the last decade. Were the owners aware that their highly valued pieces were going to be turned around and auctioned? A quick look at the catalog and you will recognize New Jersey styles and some Pennsylvania school pieces (Westown) that may or may not have been done by NJ girls boarding. But certainly, you will recognize that a significant number of the samplers are “Highly Valued”.
One of the fantastic things about Historical Societies is that they collect what is of the area, rich and poor. They are the places where the most complete records of families of the area exist and often papers relating to the girl’s family are often deposited there. One only has to delve into the new fantastic book on Connecticut Samplers (I learned about the sale/theft at the symposium there – it was going around) to realize that a whole section of Connecticut history would be lost if the society had separated the paper from the needlework. I have been going through the Newbury/Newburyport samplers of late at their society and have been thrilled that they didn’t weed out the ‘lesser pieces’. It tells the whole story that a fine art institution can not. Motif propagation, travel habits of the different social/economic levels, education of girls, etc. You need a ton of samplers to research to pull out the history of young women from the area. It is only after examining the visual record (samplers) with the girl’s genealogy and location of their family/occupation that the patterns of historical information start to become evident. Because women are rarely recorded and often their activities are recorded under their husband’s name, there is scant evidence to be had. Selling one of the few extant sets of this information can put back research irrevocably. Historical Societies are even more wonderful when you realize that often their donations are multiple pieces from the same family. Susan Schoelwer was able to pull out a book from the CHS collection that was the exact one used by the girl for her sampler design. Her name being inside the cover. Many conclusions can happen when that type of object data is at your fingertips. That only happens in Historical Society collections.
This is where the story becomes tragic – as if it isn’t tragic enough. During the process of photographing the pieces and getting them
ready for auction, the most valued piece ($50,000-$150,000) went missing and was finally reported as stolen. The antique dealers were getting calls and reports of this while we were at the CT symposium – to be on the lookout for it. Mary Bowker (1804), a piece that was Burlington County and pictured in Betty Ring’s book as one of the most significant NJ samplers known. It may be the one in the upper right of the photograph above and is shown to the side here.
You have to ask WHY WAS IT ON AUCTION in the first place?
The museum clearly knew it was important and had it on display.
The auction is Saturday, November 20th. If you want to look into this further and I suggest that you do, read the following article that was done by a reporter. I waited to post until I felt that some professionals had really looked into the story for creditability – I hate hearsay. I also spoke to a few curators at major institutions. They were upset as well.
The museum seems to be doing a backtrack – in the article that appeared yesterday in Antiques and the Arts, the museum is now quoted as saying that the sale proceeds would be “used for acquisitions only, in accordance with museum ethics guidelines”.
What in the heck are they trying to acquire to replace them? If the value is so high for a sampler that is known to be worked by a little girl in the area of your collection mandate as well as valued in the extreme by historians and collectors, why auction it? An article will be appearing just next month on the discoveries around this and other pieces like it in an upcoming issue of Antiques and Fine Art magazine. We aren’t talking about a milk jug with no markings on it that could have come from anywhere. We are talking about something that we would all pay money to go see.
Obviously, if you see this piece for sale or have any information, you need to bring it to the attention of the authorities: Burlington County Historical Society at 457 High Street, Burlington, NJ 08016, 609-386-4773, burlcohistsoc@verizon.net or the Burlington City Police Department at its main number, 609-386-0262, or on its tip line at 609-233-8548.
But you may just want to drop a line to the same historical society and ask why this piece and its cousins are up for auction in the first place. Tell them that women’s history matters. Maybe they need to know that they are making a mistake in our opinion. Ask them about their process and if common guidelines for deaccessioning were used that are standard across the museum world. What experts did they speak with. If the historians and curators are upset, maybe there are things that need to be reconsidered.
Tricia
P.S. From the comments – this has struck a cord and there are many interesting aspects that the readers are aware of. If you consider making comments here – please also email the historical society with either clarifying questions on the situation or commentary. (Updated 9:30 pm)
UPDATE (6:50 am) – I have a bit more information to share. The historical society had decided to keep six of the samplers and auction the other 85% of them. The one stolen was one of the six to keep. The six samplers were placed in a room in the historical society and locked in on a Friday and when the museum was opened on Tuesday, the sampler above was noted missing. It appears that the thief had access to the building. There are a few questions to be answered about this. First, how were the samplers to keep chosen. It wasn’t based on an installed display as the picture of the display above shows samplers that were being auctioned and one that was to be kept. A well-known historian informed me that there were extensive files on these pieces as she had donated her research on them and knew of many others who had done the same including Betty Ring. But, these same people were not contacted to give their opinion in the process (I have talked to other high-profile antique dealers/experts well known to the society and they were also not consulted). The second question to be answered is why the pieces were off the wall in the first place and in a locked room for the weekend. The last question is again, did they follow the procedures set in place for actions like this by the American Association of Museums which accredits museums and sets standards for operations and ethics. And again, I remind everyone that it never hurts to respectfully ask these questions of the institution.
I’m certainly going to do some research, but on the face of it, this doesn’t look good at all. Thanks for the heads-up.
It’s not just museum ethics, but U.S. tax laws (which, unfortunately, a lot of museums seem to be unaware of). If museums use proceeds from sales of collections for any purpose besides acquisitions, including direct collections care, they are required to capitalize their collections for the IRS.
That said, just because museum ethics permit sale of collections to fund acquisitions (primarily because art museums do it all the time and aren’t going to stop) doesn’t make it not an ethical issue. Especially for a local historical society whose mandate is to preserve local history, not necessarily to buy the nicest artifacts. This sounds like a real shame for their collections and community.
One of the things I find interesting is that the stated reason is to focus on Children and Families – excuuuuuse me? Didn’t children stitch the samplers????? Isn’t this their history????? Isn’t that your mandate?????
Here’s their mission statement:
The mission of the Burlington County Historical Society is to encourage historical study and research; to acquire and preserve records, artifacts, and articles of historical interest; and to interpret the history of the area through education, programs, projects and pursuits in order to convey this historical legacy to current and future generations..
It’s sad – I hate to see this kind of thing. I thought we were past thinking of “important historical artifacts” as not being women’s history…
Julie
Is there a museum out there that does care, could handle the samplers, and might accept our donations to help them purchase the samplers as a block?
Tricia,
I have worked at/with several museums, and none of them has ever de-accessioned anything! It makes me wonder if the staff and board know what they have. The Historical Society should have an Acquisitions Committee, comprised of board members and staff, that makes recommendations to the board and director. A decision like this should have been voted on by the full board. Any sampler that was a donation has to be vetted to see if de-accessioning is even permitted. Many people write into their gift agreement the stipulation that the artifact must be returned to the family if the institution decides not to use it or house it as originally intended. (For example, Family A donates a Conestoga wagon to the Anytown Pioneer Museum, provided that the wagon is always on display and is never loaned. If Anytown Pioneer Museum takes the wagon off display, the staff must inform the descendants of the original donors and allow them to reclaim the gift). I would be very curious to know the how long it took to arrive at the decision to de-accession these samplers, who made this decision, and the benefits are expected.
In my part of the world (Tennessee), to find 30 samplers in one collection would be unimaginable. Each house museum or historical society might have one. The Tennessee State Museum has approximately 20, most purchased within the past 10 years. Every curator (of historical sites) I know would love to find a sampler associated with his or her area. Simple marking samplers are treated with reverence. Perhaps because we have fewer, we value them more.
Jennifer
It sounds as if the people in this Historical Society do not realise or appreicate what they have/had.
There must be a group of men (sorry to be bashing men) involved in this decision or even some women who are not needleworkers. I find that both groups don’t really appreciate the work and history that goes into creating one of these wonderful things. Half of the time they only have $$$$ signs in front of their eyes.
Every bit of needlework including the simplest Alphabet Sampler is precious. When we think of how old the girls who created these masterpieces were and the times that they lived in where most of the samplers would have been stitched by candlelight. I enjoy doing reproductions of samplers and I know how much work and skill is involved in doing a sampler. I am often amazed at the age of the original maker of these samplers.
I live in Australia and I am sure that most of our Museums would give their eye teeth to have in their possession so many samplers. We don’t have the luxury of seeing so many wonderful pieces.
I am sorry to hear about the theft of this beautiful sampler. I hope that it turns up and that people involved start to realise what they have lost.
I wonder if this is a symptom of ignorance or if it is a sign of replacing what is real with virtual history.
It is too bad the historical society couldn’t brain storm with what they had before it was stolen away from them.
What a sorrowful mess.
What a terrible shame. It sounds completely contrary to both their mandate and their plans for the future! Surely there is a better way to raise money for this sort of exhibit. I understand why they want it, but they are obligated as a collecting museum as well as an exhibiting museum–even more so as a historical society. We can only hope that many of the samplers will be acquired by an institution that will preserve and value them.
The theft of the one sampler is horrifying. That this could happen does not speak well of their security or collections practices.
This happens quite alot actually, and it unbelievable! Bottom line, MONEY. Greed.
Last year I purchased an early wooden doll, not knowing her provenance. When I asked the seller where she had come from, she happily gave me the “Estate Auction” info…and honestly, I was shocked. It made me SICK to my stomach, and I felt like I was running around with my head on fire, and no one was around to see it burning….. Go ahead and do Google search on the “Holley Williams House” in Lakeville Conn. The house is HUGE, amazing, and get this, in the possession of the SAME FAMILY for over 150 years. It was a virtual time machine, with ALL THE CONTENTS being of the period, and when the last surviving family member passed away in 1971, she gifted the entire house and everything in it to the Salisbury Association (Historical Society). They needed money(for WHAT WHO KNOWS) and decided early in 2009 to sell the house, and everything in it! GASP!!!!! The house sold to a private family, and is now no longer on view. They went to a little unknown auction house, and piled everything into box lots and sold it all. All the furniture~ everything. Here is an excerpt from the Holley House Museum phamplet ” The museum contains 5 generations of family furnishings. These include silver, glass, china, toys, period clothing, and a library of over 400 volumes. Several family portraits by noted American painters hang on the walls. The collestions include a treasure trove of more than 6,000 letters, diaries of family members, and other documents wich provide an unrivaled view of life in the Northwest corner of Connecticut between 1775 and 1971. The Hollye family was involved in the iron industry, engeneering and politics. Family MEMBERS include an early GOVONOR of Conn, the engineer who brought the Bessemer steel process to the USA, the Treasurer of the Erie canal project, the first publisher of “A Visit From St Nicholas”….” and it goes on and on and on. ABSOLUTELY DISGRACEFUL
rachael
How sad to hear of this decision by the Burlington Historical Society. The samplers to be auction off are all part of such an important collection. Having viewed them all at the Freeman’s Auction site, I was amazed that they were being offered for sale,and questioned why. As a 30 year collector-researcher of American samplers, I feel blessed to own 3 very good examples from Burlington County that would be most difficult for me to even think of selling. Let’s hope that BCHS will reconsider the validity of their reasons for auctioning the pieces and allow an outstanding collection to remain in place.
barb
I think this situation is a prime example of the efforts many museums seem to be making to become more relevant to younger generations by ditching exhibits that can’t be touched in favor of more inter-active exhibits. These trendy exhibits seem to feature various bells and whistles to entertain folks who are used to video games, etc. Personally, I really regret the shift in focus from information and education to entertainment, as the information presented in the newer formats is usually pretty basic. It’s just a shame that a museum feels it has to deaccession a really valuable collection so that it can acquire new stuff that may not be as worthwhile.
My opinion only, but in my experience as a textile artist in one medium or another over the last 30 years, textiles have not always been regarded in the same light as say a painting or sculpture. And sometimes not regarded as art or valuable by the general public. Yet, when looked at from the context that in some ancient (and not so ancient)civilizations textiles were considered valuable and precious and a form of currency, or reserved for the royal elite, do our conceptions of textiles in general change? I have seen more understanding about the importance of textiles coming about over the last 10 or so years. But there is a ways to go as yet. Sometimes I think when we try to simplify it all down to gender bias, the bigger picture may be missed and the public may turn a deaf ear. From an archeological standpoint, all textiles are inportant as they give us a glimpse how a society lived at that point in time, or how advanced they were.
I have heard museums do have collections that have not been catalogued or shown. Manpower, the money to hire the manpower, may be a factor, but really, I can’t state this as a certainty. I have always thought that volunteer researchers/artists who have actually worked in a specific artistic field and willing to help catalogue those collections is one way to approach this conundrum. But as a friend of mine once said, artisits come at it differently than curators. And our teminologies differ. Would a melding of the 2 viewpoints, or at least a volunteer artist/researcher consultant perhaps keep things like this from happening in the furture? Just a rambling thought.
The theft of a piece of our history is an unmeasureable loss.
It would seem to me that the Historical Society is trying to emulate many of the “hands-on” children’s museums around the country — after all it’s much more “fun” to pretend to be a blacksmith, or a farrier or whatever other “historical” activities were to be had. Just “Looking” but not touching a piece of history isn’t nearly as entertaining to today’s children (or their parents).
That being said, those “virtual” history activities require money, and that is the bottom line. Today’s instant gratification children cannot appreciate anything that takes time to complete, it needs to be done at the push of a button or a movement of a joystick!
Getting off my soapbox now……Edy
Very sad news indeed. I’m speechless.