Sadly, Louis XV-style chair likely circa-1925

Q. I have a chair that my father purchased from the Fairchild Mansion in Oneonta, N.Y. From the little I have learned, it is a walnut Louis XV-style piece that I hope is of the period because of the wealth of the family that originally owned it. What is its value?A. Hope does indeed spring eternal, but unfortunately, when it comes to antiques, the spring often turns out to be sprung. There is no doubt this is a lovely, high-quality chair, and it is kind of, sort of in the rococo manner associated with King Louis XV of France. But we have serious doubts that it is "of the period."Born in 1710, Louis XV reigned from 1715 to his death in 1774. In furniture, the Louis XV style is generally said to be "rococo," which is derived from the French "rocaille," meaning "stone," and "coquilles," meaning shell. Rococo was initially used to describe the grottoes and fountains in the gardens around the Palace of Versailles.Rococo in furniture is characterized by the use of the cabriole leg, an S-curve in which the upper portion curves outward (convex) and the lower curve curving inward (concave). Interestingly, the convex portion of a cabriole leg is called the "knee" and the concave portion the "ankle."Many cabriole legs terminate in either a ball-and-claw foot or a pad foot, but the cabriole legs on the chair belonging to J.C. end in a rather feminine scroll foot that looks a bit like a small ball. Naturalistic carvings of rocks, shells, fruit, flowers, scrolls, ribbons and acanthus leaves (also cress, parsley, endive, palm and laurel leaves) distinguish the rococo style.On the chair in today's question, there are acanthus-type leaves on the cabriole legs, a number of scrolls with leaf tendrils and what could either be a flower or flower-shaped shell at the crest. All this seems to be rather nicely done, and we see signs that these elements may indeed have been hand-carved - at least to a certain extent.OK, all that said, why do we think this particular piece is not "of the period"? We cannot see any of the construction details (pity) that would help us make a definitive judgment, but the shell/flower crest is, in our view, incorrectly made because it is not truly naturalistic enough to be recognizable as a specific and particular form.The back, shaped something like a batwing with the crest as the beast's head, is a little too pronounced, too exuberant to be 18th-century. We believe this back is not a design element that would have been used during the reign of Louis XV, but instead is a 20th-century interpretation circa 1925.There are a number of other elements that are "wrong" with this chair, and we think that a careful examination of the underside would reveal modern construction techniques instead of 18th-century handcraftsmanship. This chair was probably once part of a larger grouping that might have included another armchair and a sofa.Finally, we want to make the observation that just about everything looks better in a mansion, and we tend to believe that wealthy families had only the best - but this is not always the case. For insurance-replacement purposes, this circa-1925 chair should be valued in the $600 to $800 range.bull; Contact Helaine Fendelman and Joe Rosson at Treasures in Your Attic, PO Box 27540, Knoxville, TN 37927 or via e-mail at treasures@knology.net.