AHIS20018 Chap.6 Authenticity, Forgery and the Genuine Article
Authenticity, Forgery and the Genuine Article
Week 6 sets out the subject's most exam-relevant vocabulary: forgery (made to deceive from creation), fake (a genuine object altered later to misrepresent it), copy (made by another hand, no intent to deceive) and replica (made by the artist/workshop, not deceptive).
The chapter also separates attribution from provenance, and works through five real, paraphrased cases from the subject's own assigned reading (Fletcher, 'Fakes, Forgeries and Thefts,' 2017) and a related reading on the Indonesian painting-forgery market.
What this chapter covers
- 01
Four words, one decision tree: forgery, fake, copy, replica distinguished by intent and by who altered the object
- 02
Attribution (who made it) vs provenance (who has owned it) as two independently checkable questions
- 03
The 'provenance trap': fabricating ownership records to legitimise a forgery
- 04
Two forgery mechanisms: deceiving the eye (technical imitation) vs deceiving the archive (fabricated provenance)
- 05
A commercial-gallery forgery scandal and the safeguards that should have caught it
- 06
A fake (a genuine, later-altered object) vs an ongoing forgery market (Indonesian painting forgery)
- 07
Whether a work can still be valuable when it is neither singular nor original
Classify fake, forgery, copy and replica
- 1(a) Copy — made by another hand, no intent to deceive.
- 1(b) Replica — made by the artist/workshop with their own knowledge; not deceptive.
- 1(c) Fake — a genuine object later altered to misrepresent its authorship.
Key terms
- Forgery
- A work made with intent to deceive from the moment of its creation, fraudulently represented as authentic — the discipline's own precise definition, distinct from a fake.
- Fake
- A genuine object later altered or modified from its original state to misrepresent its authorship or origin — for example, a false signature added to a real period object.
- Copy
- A work made by a hand other than the original artist's, without intent to deceive — a class exercise, homage or period pastiche.
- Replica
- A repetition of a composition made by the original artist or their workshop, with their own knowledge and approval — not deceptive, unlike a forgery of the same composition.
- Attribution
- The scholarly assignment of a work to a specific maker, based on connoisseurship, technical/scientific analysis and documentation.
- Provenance
- The documented chain of ownership of an object over time, used to support attribution and establish legal title — in some markets also expected to document community or cultural origin.
- Provenance trap
- The deliberate manipulation of an object's ownership and transaction history to legitimise it, targeting both buyers and provenance researchers who trust documentary evidence.
- Reconstructed work
- An object rebuilt from surviving parts or from documentation, which raises the originality question separately from any question of intent to deceive.
Authenticity, Forgery and the Genuine Article FAQ
What is the difference between a fake and a forgery in art history?
A forgery is made with intent to deceive from the moment of its creation. A fake is a genuine object that is later altered or modified to misrepresent its authorship or origin — the object itself is old and real, but a later change (such as an added signature) is what deceives.
What is the difference between a copy and a replica?
A copy is made by a hand other than the original artist's, without intent to deceive (a class exercise or homage, for example). A replica is a repetition of a composition made by the original artist or their own workshop, with their knowledge — it is not deceptive.
What is attribution, and how is it different from provenance?
Attribution answers who made a work, established through connoisseurship, technical analysis and documentation. Provenance answers who has owned a work and when, documented through an ownership chain. The two support each other but are independently checkable — a forger can fabricate one without the other.
What is the 'provenance trap'?
A term for the deliberate fabrication of an object's ownership and transaction history to make it appear legitimate. It is especially dangerous because it can deceive provenance researchers directly, not just buyers, since a fabricated paper trail can look identical to a genuine one.
Can a technically weak forgery still succeed in deceiving the market?
Yes — the subject's assigned reading documents a case where a dealer fabricated provenance records at scale rather than relying purely on technical imitation, showing that a forger does not need to fool a connoisseur's eye if they can fool the documentary record instead.
Can a work be valuable when it is neither unique nor the first of its kind?
Often yes, and the tutorial sets this as an open question rather than a trick. Prints, casts and authorised editions are all multiple and all traded, and a documented copy can hold real historical value. What collapses value is concealed intent, not multiplicity itself.
Assessment move
Re-run every authenticity case you meet through the forgery/fake/copy/replica decision tree, naming who made or altered the object and whether deception was intended at that point — if a case genuinely will not resolve cleanly, state the ambiguity explicitly rather than forcing a label the evidence does not support.
Working through Authenticity, Forgery and the Genuine Article in AHIS20018? Sia is AskSia’s AI Arts and Humanities tutor — ask any AHIS20018 Authenticity, Forgery and the Genuine Article question and get a clear, step-by-step explanation grounded in how AHIS20018 is taught and assessed. Read this chapter free, then take your hardest questions to Sia.
