Page 11 - Abstracts of the 2nd Slovenia–Turkey Bilateral Colloquium
P. 11
Slovenia–Turkey Bilateral Colloquium · Portorož, 19 May 2023
Fake, Forgery, and Authenticity
in Archaeology: Archaeological
Science in Practice
Gonca Dardeniz Arıkan
Istanbul University, Turkey
goncadardenizarikan@istanbul.edu.tr
This contribution will discuss fakes and forgeries in archaeology, deriving
case studies from Near Eastern archaeology, particularly Türkiye. Distin-
guishing between faked, forged, and authentic objects are possible with
traditional archaeological methods and could be occasionally evident to
a trained naked eye. However, with the ‘immensely improving skills and
background knowledge’ of specific forgers/dealers, it sometimes becomes
very blurry to guarantee the authenticity of an archaeological piece; this
is especially true for small but valuable items like seals, coins, and jew-
ellery. The rising conflicts in the Near East trigger the illicit traffic of gen-
uine artefacts, fakes, and forgeries. Some archaeologists have been ac-
cused of faking artefacts, creating severe scientific debates, and adding
another layer to the complexity of fakes and forgeries. In certain compli-
cated cases, traditional distinction methods require support from archae-
ological sciences. Scientific techniques varying from simple microscopy
to synchrotron tomography provide valuable hints to test the authenticity
of archaeomaterials, which are invisible to the naked eye.
Keywords: fake, forgery, archaeology, typology, archaeological science, in-
terdisciplinary research, Türkiye
11
Fake, Forgery, and Authenticity
in Archaeology: Archaeological
Science in Practice
Gonca Dardeniz Arıkan
Istanbul University, Turkey
goncadardenizarikan@istanbul.edu.tr
This contribution will discuss fakes and forgeries in archaeology, deriving
case studies from Near Eastern archaeology, particularly Türkiye. Distin-
guishing between faked, forged, and authentic objects are possible with
traditional archaeological methods and could be occasionally evident to
a trained naked eye. However, with the ‘immensely improving skills and
background knowledge’ of specific forgers/dealers, it sometimes becomes
very blurry to guarantee the authenticity of an archaeological piece; this
is especially true for small but valuable items like seals, coins, and jew-
ellery. The rising conflicts in the Near East trigger the illicit traffic of gen-
uine artefacts, fakes, and forgeries. Some archaeologists have been ac-
cused of faking artefacts, creating severe scientific debates, and adding
another layer to the complexity of fakes and forgeries. In certain compli-
cated cases, traditional distinction methods require support from archae-
ological sciences. Scientific techniques varying from simple microscopy
to synchrotron tomography provide valuable hints to test the authenticity
of archaeomaterials, which are invisible to the naked eye.
Keywords: fake, forgery, archaeology, typology, archaeological science, in-
terdisciplinary research, Türkiye
11
