Ever heard of "Andrius Booth (19th century)"? Seems to be related to "David Teniers (American 19th century)", which is worth at least $20,000!

At Simpson Galleries, in Houston, they sell on 17 May an "Andrius Booth (19th century)", estimated at $3,000 to $5,000.

Where to start with this one? The name they were looking for is "Andries Both". He was a 17th century painter (1612-1642), not a 19th century painter. If they mean that this is a 19th century copy or a 19th century work in the style of, then they should say so. There are plenty of typical auction terms available to convey this. If, on the other hand, they believe this to be a 17th century work, then they have made three crucial typos in the main part of the description of this painting, making it nearly impossible to find through alerts.

The painting is not an original Both, and may well be 19th century. But then it really isn't worth the estimate at all, they will be very lucky to get the $1,500 starting price. If it is a 17th century work by a follower, then the chances of getting near that price are increasing, but I doubt it. It is a typical work by a late follower, looking nice from a distance but getting worse up close, although it is far from terrible. But for the $600 or so that the auction house fetches for the sale of this work at bottom estimate, they should do a better job in describing it.

Bad habit

Of course, looking further in the same auction, one encounters another work by the same studio (judging from the back of the painting), this time a "David Teniers (American 19th century)", estimated at (I kid you not) $20,000 to $30,000. The Both was monogrammed, this one is fully signed, but it is more obviously a fake. Instead of 19th century, one may have to look at 21st century for these.

It is, for what it's worth, a copy of a 1641 Teniers lost in Berlin during the Second World War.

In any case, having one badly described and estimated work is careless. But having several, and one so extremely overestimated as the "Teniers", is not careless, it is (at the very best) complete incompetence.