In determining the value of a painting, a number of factors mustbe considered, including the artist, provenance, the quality ofwork, period (date), and condition. In many instances we valuepaintings whose style and date of creation matches those ofwell-known artists though they lack signatures. High qualityworks produced in a specific period that cannot be directlyconnected to an individual artist by a signature or significantprovenance, though created in the same style of an artist, areconsidered school or genre paintings. Forexample, many drawings in the market which cannot be attributed toRembrandt yet have all the physical attributes of a Rembrandt aresold as “school of Rembrandt.” While an unsigned painting by aparticular artist would have less value than a signed example bythat very same artist, unsigned genre paintings do not command thehighest prices in the marketplace.

We exercised this rule of thumb when asked to value a paintingdescribed to be by Maxfield Parrish (American, 1870 – 1966) titledAngel with a claimed value of $200,000. Because thepainting was burned in a fire and there were no existingphotographs, we spoke to the insured in great detail about thispainting. It was described to us as depicting an angel withextravagant, delicately painted gossamer wings on a rock on herknees, topless with a diaphanous cloth draped over her. Theentire painting measured approximately 20” x 30”. Thepainting was not signed and, according to the insureds, they werenever able to attribute the piece to Maxfield Parrish. It wasbequeathed to them 20 years earlier from a family friend whoreceived it from his sister who was said to have received itdirectly from Maxfield Parrish when they studied together at theArt Institute of Chicago. Knowing Maxfield Parrish's work, this wasa perfect depiction of his style and subject matter.

Enservio Select referenced Maxfield Parrish's mostrecent catalogue raisonné, The Art of Maxfield Parrish,published by John Goodspeed Stuart, which references every knownParrish image, to find an image representing the subject propertypainting's description. While there are many Parrish paintingsdepicting a side view of a woman kneeling on rocks (Starsand Morning are two famous related images), there are noParrish paintings or illustrations which depict an angel withgossamer wings, and gossamer wings in general were not an attributefound in any of his work. Furthermore, Parrish's femalefigures were not topless as the angel in the subject propertypainting was.

We also consulted with Maxfield Parrish authority and expertAlma Gilbert-Smith of the Parrish House Foundation about thispainting. The Foundation believes that the subject property,entitled Angel, is not the sort of composition whichParrish did. Secondly, she stated that all finished Parrishpaintings were signed. Accordingly, Gilbert-Smith, based onthe information provided, concludes the painting was not completedby Maxfield Parrish.

Based on our research, we found that the claimed painting is notlikely the work of Maxfield Parrish and valued it as such. Ifwe make the extraordinary assumption that this painting was a verywell-painted depiction of an angel, as described, from the late19^th/early 20^th century and unsigned, thereplacement value would be considerably less than the claimedvalue. In this instance, where the painting owned by theinsured bears resemblance to paintings by Maxfield Parrish butcannot be attributed to Parrish, we have priced it as a “school of”Maxfield Parrish because it was produced in a specific period andin the same style as the artist.

While Maxfield Parrish is considered a major American artistwhose works bring premium prices in the current marketplace, notall high quality works produced in the same time are seen in such afavorable light. Considering the size of the painting andsales for “school of” Maxfield Parrish paintings, and paintingscreated in the style of Maxfield Parrish, we determined thispainting to have a replacement value of $7,500. Thisrepresented a $192,500 difference from the claimed value of$200,000.