From a strictly technical point of view, the definition of ‘forgery’ is based on the recognition of an intentionally fraudulent purpose behind the creation of artefacts imitating older originals (Grafton, Reference Grafton1990). Sometimes overlooked and considered a ‘minor sin’, committed at the expense of gullible collectors and avid museums, forgery should instead be regarded as a complex and multi-faceted phenomenon, involving many agents and factors: apart from being a valuable historical document, accounting for past attitudes towards Antiquity and aesthetic taste choices, over the centuries forgery has served as an instrument of nationalisms or religious fervour as well as an effective tool for gaining insight into collectors’ and the forgers’ own psychology (Eisenberg, Reference Eisenberg1992). Last but not least, in Western culture, the dichotomy authentic/fake has a normative meaning with moral implications, as fake objects involve deliberate deception and the breakdown of established ethical codes (Lessing, Reference Lessing1965: 461–71). What is more, investigations carried out on the Italian territory and abroad (Carabinieri. Comando Tutela Patrimonio Culturale, 2019: 25; Faude-Nagel, Reference Faude-Nagel2013) have shown how the falsification of ancient artefacts also plays an important part in the illicit traffic in antiquities, a widespread criminal practice which substantially contributes to fuel some of the most relevant criminal organisations worldwide.

In the last few decades, the topic of forgery has become a focus of research, resulting in the emergence of different research groups in Italy and an array of new publications (Carabinieri. Comando tutela patrimonio artistico, Ministero per i beni e le attività culturali & Università degli Studi Roma Tre, 2018) and exhibitions (Jones et al., Reference Jones, Craddock, Barker and Museum1990; Neuchâtel & Kaeser, Reference Neuchâtel and Kaeser2011), all of which have tried to explore the meanings and aspects of forgery in different ways. The issue is, therefore, a very current and sensitive one, and a book that looks at the phenomenon from a multiplicity of viewpoints is most welcome.

Anthropology of Forgery stems from a Winter School held at the University of Padua in February 2017, and is one of the outcomes of the ‘MemO’ project (‘The Memory of Objects: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Study, Digitalisation and Valorisation of Greek and South-Italian Pottery in Veneto’), whose main aim is the study of archaeological collections and antiquities collecting in Veneto using a manifold, innovative approach. For this reason, the project team decided to consider the unprovenanced antiquities (as the pieces from a historical collection almost invariably are) and the fake artefacts in these collections as interactive ‘research and teaching tools’ (p. 10) for testing low-cost and non-invasive authentication methods, but also for ‘creating an online database for the collection, management, processing, and sharing of archaeological forgeries as both an “archive of precedents” for collectors and dealers and a research tool for scholars […] and a “virtual musealisation” to the wider audience’ (p. 12), in order to exploit the informative potential of forgeries and simultaneously try to develop a community awareness on the crimes against cultural heritage.

The volume collects twenty-eight papers written by scholars, officials from the Italian Ministry of Cultural Heritage and Activities and heritage professionals from different European countries, USA, and Ukraine, further enriched by the contributions of students of the Winter School and guest contributors. Most articles use a broad range of case studies, making use of all kinds of archaeological materials, which are organised in four main thematic areas.

Part One focuses on ‘Restorations, Reproductions, Revival’, analysing the concept of forgery in different national and linguistic contexts, and endeavouring to propose a taxonomic classification in order to come to a shared lexicon of the phenomenon (Fiorillo & Cataldo, Matzke, Boschetti). It is well known that restorations can considerably alter the materiality of archaeological artefacts, especially when it comes to interventions carried out in past centuries, when the need to display complete-looking objects was paramount. For this reason, some of the papers in this section try to outline the boundary between restoration and falsification, and how to effectively communicate these modifications to the wider audience of museum visitors (De Paoli, Anton), especially where historical collections are concerned (Guimier-Sorbets, Giacobello, Mainieri). The latter are a privileged observatory to assess the multi-faceted nature and impact of forgery in past centuries (Anton). One of the main issues raised during the Winter School and also in this publication relates to the reassessment and contextualisation of forgeries detected especially in museum collections, which, far from being perceived as flaws or errors, could play a key role in educating and forming the public opinion on the risks represented by an overly lenient attitude towards falsification and forgers.

Part Two, ‘In Pursue of the Authentic: Archaeological and Archaeometric Investigations’, presents different tools and approaches related to diverse archaeological materials and artefacts. This is a very interesting and innovative section of the book, touching also on one of the most important issues related to forgery, that is the assessment of private collections by scholars and officials of the Ministry of Cultural Heritage, a delicate and often controversial matter, as it sometimes exposes the limits of connoisseurship (Bottini, Reference Bottini and Zuchtriegel2016: 48). It is well known that archaeometric analyses can be a rather time-consuming and expensive tool, which not all university departments or public offices can afford. Nevertheless, it must be noted that, due to the importance of scientific methods for assessing authenticity, especially thermoluminescence for ceramics and X-ray fluorescence for metals, they perhaps deserved greater emphasis within the volume, which seems to be still slightly affected by a traditional and connoisseurship-based approach. In fact, a first group of papers highlights the possibilities of professional expertise, with the attempt by Zamparo at tracing a methodological framework for identification, describing ‘the interaction between professional archaeologist and artefact’ (p. 139), while Bernard endeavours to propose an ‘authentication protocol’ (p. 145) combining archaeological and archaeometric analyses (though relying primarily on the former); Rebaudo provides an interesting and insightful case study, proposing an evaluation method based on macrophotography which can be of great use when economic constraints hinder the application of archaeometry. Other articles (Tremain, Stella, Delfino) explore the potential of basic, non-invasive techniques for authentication of artefacts in collections, highlighting the double nature possessed by forgeries: on the one hand, they can substantially harm research by giving a warped idea of archaeological objects and their circulation (Stella); on the other hand, once they are correctly identified, it is possible to exploit their educational potential to build awareness among a museum's public and to gain psychological and ‘behavioural’ insights into collectors and forgers themselves. This section is concluded by a remarkable paper by Craddock, who, as a guest contributor, draws on multiple examples to show the importance of reconstructing the life history of an artefact and the necessity for cooperation between different expertise in order to correctly assess its authenticity. The notion of authenticity itself, which is central to the concept of forgery, is explored in different sections of the book, but especially in Part One, in relation to ancient restorations (Anton, Fiorillo & Cataldo; see also Tremain in Part Two, Prisco in Part Three, and Babini in Part Four).

Part Three is devoted to ‘Archaeological Forgeries and the History of Culture(s)’. Since fraudulence can be regarded as one of the main connotations of forgery, this section clearly illustrates the informative potential of fake objects in providing pieces of evidence about the motivations that, over time, led forgers in their deception, and how these were quite often in tune with the cultural and political context of their time. ‘Each generation fakes the things it covets the most’ (Jones, Reference Jones, Jones, Craddock, Barker and Museum1990:13; but see Frieman, Reference Frieman and Eriksen2010): fakes can be produced for personal profit, but they can also support nationalistic claims and research interests, as the contributions by Pazienza on Lombard forgeries and Corrochano Labrador on fake Visigothic antiquities demonstrate. Therefore, understanding the rationale underlying particular forgeries also gives insight into their historical and cultural background. The history of cultures and cultural exchange between Italy and France is also illustrated in the paper by Prisco, which focuses on how the problem of forgery was dealt with in both countries from a theoretical viewpoint. Prisco offers an account of the different positions on the subject taken by two of the most relevant art historians of the twentieth century, Cesare Brandi and Étienne Gilson, and describes the debate concerning the role of diagnostics in the authentication of artworks between the 1930s and the 1950s. In those decades, the didactic function of forgery had already been acknowledged in Italy through the planned ‘Museo del Falso’ (Museum of Fakes) at the Istituto Centrale per il Restauro in Rome, although the project never materialised.

Finally, part Four explores the delicate issues connected to ‘Legislation and the Antiquities Market: Institutions, Regulations, and Procedures’. This part brings together papers from professionals working in public heritage safeguarding as well as auction houses and offers multiple perspectives on the themes of antiquities’ legal protection and circulation. Nagel (Reference Nagel2004) has provided a useful description of the premises to forgery: 1. Assertive authors; 2. Collectors; 3. Art market; 4. Intermediaries (dealers). It is, therefore, easy to see how this phenomenon involves a multiplicity of agents, and how building an operative framework to tackle forgery and the illicit trafficking that comes with it should be of paramount importance. As an example, assessing the financial and cultural damage caused by these phenomena is key to understanding their real dimensions, although many European countries are not yet prepared enough to confront these issues from a legal point of view (Weiler-Esser's paper). Thus, the refinement of existing legal tools, where ‘fake’ is sometimes defined too vaguely or left implicit, as well as a broader reflection on the definition of ‘collection’ are urgently needed (Babini, Pettenò). One last, interesting contribution (Pancotti) describes the point of view of auction houses regarding the legal selling and circulation of archaeological artefacts, especially as far as the falsification of numismatic objects is concerned.

The main achievement of this book is surely the wide range of the approach to the subject—historical, cultural, social, technical, and legal. Specialists and professionals from many diverse, sometimes contrasting, spheres (such is the case of superintendency officers and market professionals) were brought together, and it is surely refreshing and thought-provoking to be able to read such a diversity of points of view in one book. This volume can, therefore, be regarded as a good guide to the phenomenon for an initial approach, as well as being a valid source of illuminating case studies on the different nuances of forgery.

In conclusion, the book endeavours to draw as complete a picture as possible of the phenomenon of forgery: an attempt which appears, on the whole, successful; although a stronger emphasis on the various scientific techniques that can be used to detect counterfeit objects would have been desirable and will hopefully be achieved in the forthcoming proceedings of the 2019 iteration of the Winter School.