Adam Cherubini
>Bill,

My sense is there is no such thing as an "academic interest" in period furniture. The only possible exception is us, as Wilbur has pointed out.

In my experience, the 'hallowed halls' of various institutions are chiefly interested in how tools shape styles and most importantly, how they might be able to make attributions based on tool marks or techniques. Pretty sure the "Garvan carver" is identified by three "signature" vee gouge cuts on the ends of acanthus leaves. As long as a dealer or museum (I'm finding less and less difference between the two) can make a compelling case for an attribution, the perception becomes reality at Sotheby's.

So in terms of what they really want, a link between the tools in the chest and the craftsman's products IS helpful. What they would like to know is whether the tools in the chest influenced the design or if they were essentially irrelevant. Was style/form a function of the tools one had on hand, the joinery one was capable of, materials availability, or was it (as I think they largely believe) some ephmeral, possibly market driven, compulsion?

At the heart of this issue is my pondering; What is a regional style? When viewed as a jumbled pile, period furniture could probably be better (i.e. more accurately) segregated. My sense is that like local sports teams, producing regional categories appeals to our tribalism. This explains how there could be no such thing as "Southern Furniture"* and why some desperately need there to be.

Adam

* I don't know enough about Southern furniture to say for sure that a Southern regional style doesn't exist. I can say I've not been convinced by what I have seen.