david Chamberlain

Looks like an alien Starship. That's about as far as I've got with it. David

I was thankfully one of those who got to enjoy Bev. Brule's marathon phone calls and we sort of agreed to disagree re. the 1994+ Sulphide controversy. Oh, good point Clyde letting people know that this is an entirely different matter than the Lausha sulphides reproduced only a couple years ago and that sold for multiple thousands of dollars on eBay. I still have my notes on that Repro Symposium I did a few times back then including the examples I brought to it. Cathy Runyan-Svacina attended one of those sessions. I do consider it a crime the Lausha sulphide matter, the Peltier Comic Box repros and the Marble Tournament Metals all at this instigation of Hansel De Sousa. Hard to imagine what he could have been thinking. David P.S. As usual on the weekends I'll be out of here except for a small window early Sunday morning.

I just sent a set to Jenny gratis so maybe she could photograph them and pop them up. They really are rather an undistinguished marble; they've just had a lot of press and confusion. David

Annoying? I don't really see that surfacing. I did do a quick surface surfing and felt that Crystal Bowersox put her heart and soul into it. David

Actually numerous locales were postured re. the provenance of the marbles: California where they first burst on the scene big time, Florida, the major Antique Meet in Brimfield, MA, Germany, and on and on. I think people started making up there own derivation information. You see something like this all the time on eBay even with full fledged legitimate marbles. Some basically non-marble person will get say some decent Akro marbles of particular distinction and as if it's epidemic they'll catch the compulsion to make up some haywire story about their acquisition. More often than not this is done with marbles of little or no distinction at all. Bloody amazing! David

Talked with Ron yesterday evening mainly re. the latest Joker Run, general Chat Board interactions but also the Paul Bunyans. The PB's had vexed him for years. Even with the verbal ancestral information provided in his 2007 statement regarding them we mutually agreed that there's often a diminishment of memory over certain things that were not necessarily consequential at the time. It wasn't stated quite that way but that's the jist of it. There's a degree of attention brought to marbles these days that was never so dense and exacting in the past. David

Without going into the facets of this subject adnausium for the Scientific tests were considerable and only conclusive in that they made a determination that they were not 19th Century Sulphides. All the arguments against them again aimed at proving this one point. There's no doubt about that. I would say that there's nothing wrong about them being made in the 20th Century and there's no reason why they couldn't have been made as early as the 1930s/40s/50 as there is literature in the field of marbles stating that people collected marbles that early(Well, of course!) and also knew the comparative rarity of certain Sulphides. It doesn't take much imagination to realize that a glass maker with a marble interest couldn't have knocked out these unusual Sulphides. I want to see ironclad documentation that gives up the person who made them especially if anything like fraud was their motivation. I thought it was a crime at the time the Sulphides first arrived on the scene that not too long afterwards Rolf Wald was accused/suspected of having made them. There isn' t a contemporary marble maker with more integrity. It was crazy the circumstances and the bad blood going back 'n' forth over these marbles. I might add that some of the finest and most knowledgeable people in the field of marbles who have legendary collections consider the marbles legitimate. At the same time there were other equally as respected people in the field of marbles who considered them fraudulent. Unfortunately the matter is ugly even today. Re. Paul's and the ACRN's results and conclusions they are really one in the same in their Experiment source. Other separate test were done that in fact contradicted and questioned the earlier tests. I was at the Reynoldsburg OH marble meet the days that Paul was passing out copies of the ACRN newsletter(June 1994) with the article regarding the earlier tests. I truly understand Paul's deep difficulty with these marbles as the sulphide as a marble is his baby. I would feel hurt and doubtful, being he, not only because of my love for the marbles but my respect for the marble and my concern for the established types. I should probably make a Disclaimer here and state that I have never particularly warmed to sulphides. I find them a bit of a contrived marble. Hey! We all have out favorites! Anyway, I didn't intend to go on like this but when I get started on the subject I get a little crazy! I need at least one example for some seriously planned/intended Destructive Analysis to be done at New York University by a noted Glass Professor. I would like to see current state-of-the-art brought to bear on these marbles. I do not believe that has truly been done yet even with the tests that saw it both ways. Even the MCSA in their official newsletter kept repeating that the matter was inconclusive. I believe it was stated as such(inconclusive) in their book treatment as well. Paul, of course, didn't hold back one iota in declaring his feelings about them....it was classic! Anyway, enuff for now. David P.S. I have practically all the Tests, the articles, the newsletters that touched on the subject all saved from the period subsequent to their arrival at the Los Angeles Marble Meet. Willing to send copies to seriously interested parties or anyone who would care to upload them for perusal. Personally I find the whole matter at this date inconclusive. Like I said, "Show me the money!" Meaning, show me your culprit who did these and was motivated fraudulently.

Paul Bunyans are definitely a patch style marble. Brushed patch in many cases throughout the 5-6 basic styles and then the singularly hybrid style that have surfaced in bags and at the same time as the Ravenswood find in WV in 1987. I got all my Paul Bunyans at that time as I did the Ravenswood marbles. I always wanted to consider them Ravenswood but the matter kept getting clouded. This was between 1989 and 2000+. Then in recent years I'd accepted that they were Akro. In all honesty, this is a case of someone who should have known.....me. I swear since 2009 there have been repeated back 'n' forths here where the 'eyelash' appearance on some of the Paul Bunyans was given credence again as linking them to Akro. I'm hoping that Ron's 2007 Statement is the last word on them because I can't imagine anything sounding more definitive and then it's coming from Ron. Not to inflate his head but if there's something about these marbles(or most any marbles) that Ron doesn't know than there's no one that knows it! David

n2marbles, That's the ubiquitous Ravenswood Paul Bunyan bag and it has been pretty much determined that Akro made them. Ye ol' 'eyelash' determinant. I wish Al would weigh in re. any large ones in bags besides this particular bag. Re. the thought that there weren't many smaller ones assuming we're talking about 5/8". Well.....not! In 1987 two tons of them surfaced in a warehouse in WV. This is doccumented in Castle & Peterson. I went through many of the 50 lb. boxes that were shipped to California in 1989. There was a s---load of them! And my suspicions are that those two tons worth were just the tip of the iceberg production-wise. David

Oh no! Not the California Sulphides again! I know I'll just have something to say. Dear Jesus please put the brakes on me! David

Aw Griff! Lighten up. I don't have TV either but once Idol gets a head of steam you can't deny some of them young voices. Reality TV I'm with you all the way; it's a non-starter. Just check out some of those clicks available in 'onemorepatty's' Thread WAY OFF TOPIC. That will put you spinnin' David

My suspicions are that some latitude was used in the article when the author said "seven sizes are made." It probably should have said "seven sizes can be made." Between the few people I've seen with advanced collections of Ravenswood marbles there is just a small smattering of larger examples. I have a 13/16" a I recall that was authenticated by Mike Johnson and I have a 3/4" serious brown one; other than that....zilch! Oh, a few approaching 11/16"+ but that's it. Maybe Al can provide some info. on the number of types of Ravenswood bags in which there was "One Large One." I'll have to take another look at that Ravenswood Catalog. By the way, I have some extra mint examples of that if anyone is interested. David

Just thought I'd say that the marbles look very much original to the box to me and a nice set regardless of any color elitism I may have developed. It could bring a decent price if sold but not one in the atmosphere. Maybe considering the circumstances of the acquisition and the years it has been held this is something special to hand down to a son or daughter.....David

I've been surfing looking for a balls-up thread and this one appears to fit the bill.....ball, that is. Are you selling the rubber ball? High bounce? I collect Super Balls or High Bounce Balls. Even have some pee wees or pretty close to it. Yes, Paul's an authority on these although probably somewhat apoplectic over the new ones. Just casually mention California Sulphides to him! David

I think your price will be predicated on the color of the marbles in the top two rows. Are they amber, orange or peach? If amber then "Ho Hum!" but if orange or peach it is an entirely different matter. David

'Tis all relative......David

O.K. I'm reversing/retracting all previous conjectures on this Auction and going for the Ajax Marble. And 'true' this is about as random a mix as you could ever expect to come across. Those JHM & SP marbles could have worked their way into the lot 10-15 years ago. David

Am I missing something. I'm not barnyard savvy but that looks a lot like a rooster to me. David

The thing that made me suspect was that in the multiplicity of photos provided there were not close-ups of the JHM Golden Rebel and the Patrick Superman thus leaving it open to conjecture on those two. And it could just have been a coincidence. You can't help but conclude though that those two marbles are driving the auction. The photo array sort of smacked of deviousness. Of course, one has to be somewhat devious themselves to work out these machinations! David

o.k. got that. Right side of eBay auction where it says "Ask seller a question." Thanks, David

I swear! Now I've seen it all. I thought I was the only person with a collection of CAC halves. Got mine honestly from Brian Estepp about 15 years ago so if anyone wants to make a killer ring inexpensively I'm your man. I think I have something like sixteen. Great learning tool for what goes on inside a CAC high end marble. David

I've got a seventh sense for deviousness. David

Enough of us have spot-on knowledge to be able to provide a warning w/o fear that we're squashing marble trade and Clyde's proviso provides adequate documentation justification. Of course, like myself, I haven't the first idea how to computer-wise advise the seller/buyer. Anyone care to spell it out to me and set me off on another path of grief? David

Just a quick one here....The Golden Rebel looks like a JHM and the Superman a Patrick. David

My memory could be failing me but I met the Jeff Hale that I alluded to in a previous Post in NH at an antique outdoor show in the 1990s. Serious slag collector. I will admit to memory failings. Keeping everyone straight gets to be tough. Just try responding to someone you don't know who comes up to you at a flea market on a Saturday in the upper mid-West and starts off by saying, "Are you David Chamberlain?" Yikes! You first double-clutch and wonder just who you are before attempting to make a connection with the person coming at you. David