[meteorite-list] What is Provenance?

From: cdtucson at cox.net <cdtucson_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 13:09:31 -0500
Message-ID: <20111114130931.BY1NO.47561.imail_at_fed1rmwml41>

List,
Our hobby of collecting meteorites is strongly dictated by provenance so I ask ; which of the two primary definitions below most apply's to the collection of meteorites and why?
 
Merriam-Webster Online dictionary defines provenance as
(1) the origin, source.
(2) the history of ownership of a valued object or work of art or literature.
Origin; Ancestry, Parentage.
Source; Point of origin or beginning.

It seems to me that without having a bullet proof origin the history of ownership wouldn't mean much. And knowing where a meteorite comes from does indeed add to it's value. Once origin is scientifically proven then and only then does history of ownership play a role. It then actually plays a huge role.
 Back in 1991 I was asked to sell Gina Haag's collection of meteorites in my upscale Art Gallery.
Gina Haag for those who are new to this hobby was Bob Haag's first wife.
After their divorce Gina asked me to help her sell her material. With Bob's name associated with the collection it was very easy to sell the entire collection for her rather quickly.
Back then there was no Internet and even Bob would sell material by Xerox copy's sent through the mail. He would trace the actual slice of the meteorite and add a brief description and mail it off to his list of collectors. I still have such lists as I used them as a price guideline for Gina's meteorites.
They flew out of the gallery for two main reasons. The first was origin. People could not believe they could actually own a real piece of a falling star. And second was the fact that many people had seen Bob on TV pitching these rocks from space.
Origin has two meanings in our collecting world. One is the origin in the universe and the next is the origin of where it was found on Earth. Both being of significant importance. This also helps us categorize the rocks.
Unlike coins and most other collectibles condition plays a small role in the evaluation of meteorites. We tend to treat our rocks more like works of art and a rusty or ugly work of art is worth less than pristine beautiful samples but, origin still rules.
I can only guess why American meteorites are worth so much more than ones found elsewhere. As with Art it might be because Americans have the most money to invest? This seems to be true of other art forms as well. I mean people pay more for work by Jackson Pollock (140 mil.) versus Picasso (100 mil) I think just because one is an American and the other is not.
Similarly in our world people pay more when certain names are associated with the rocks. Nininger, Haag, Chadni, The Meteorite Men, TCU, ASU. etc. ...
Falls vs. finds are another unique aspect of our hobby. This I understand as the falls add a great story to the collection. What I don't get is why people are willing to pay a premium price for an initial offering when they know from past experience that the price will likely fall once the initial excitement fades. Also people will pay more if it hit or killed something. Even the carcase's and otherwise damaged man made things are worth money and they are not even meteorites.
Of course it goes back to origin. If it hit something it must be from space. No boubt a doubt it. And if the other origin is the moon the sky would be the limit to the value whereas a common type can be very affordable.
So, it seems to me our best collections should be filled with not only scientificly verified material but also with labels from great sources. We have a very unique addiction here.
Please share your thoughts.
Thanks
Carl meteoritemax

--
Cheers

Received on Mon 14 Nov 2011 01:09:31 PM PST