View Single Post
Old 31st August 2016, 07:35 PM   #49
mross
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 478
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim Simmons
Thank you for that link. Provides a great deal of food for thought. Yes faking and reproductions add to collecting problems. The foul cry fake is a way to end any real investigation. I often think especially where an object does not clearly fit in " fake " category who really has the authority and ultimate knowledge. Those who have been in the scene for a long time and gain a kind of following and often dealership never seem to have fakes . Only you as a newbie or potential customer wanting to perhaps make a trade. I came across a very interesting Web page about ancient Peru ceramics. The jist of it was some experts are actually gaining their knowledge and expertise on fakes. I will add it when I find it again.
If you want to get really crazy here is progression for your consideration.
1)Total fake modern made.
2)Real broken artifact made into something new;
a) Made into something new in modern times
b) Made into something "new" in ancient times.
3)Real artifact made into something new
a) Modified by modern man
b) Modified by ancient man - if you want to see a artifact collector cry show him a clovis point made into something else.
4)Real artifact "enhanced"
a) Enhanced by modern man -this could be anything from resharpening to fixing a base to augmenting serrations.
b) Enhanced by ancient man -see above.
So where do you draw the line? If you think any of these things are easy to detect I refer you to "Authenticating Ancient Indian Artifacts, How to recognize reproduction and altered artifacts" by Jim Bennett
mross is offline   Reply With Quote