The article implies that the advice of the committee was superseded by the subsequent metal analysis. That is incorrect. The committee’s view remains as it was in its letter of June 21, 2023. That is that “the cup is in all probability an amalgam of different elements, some of which may be older than others”.
The view was that “in its present form, it is most unlikely to date from the late 16th or early 17th century”. In the auction catalogue, the letter was wrongly paraphrased: “In its present form it is likely to date from the late 16th or early 17th century.”
John Stirling
Partner for and on behalf of Gillespie Macandrew LLP
