Advertisement

Profiling Art Forgers

  • Noah Charney
Chapter

Abstract

Unlike art thieves, who do not fit a specific criminal profile, art forgers largely do. The vast majority of those who have been found out adhere to a very narrow description, particularly when it comes to their origin story and initial motivation to turn to forgery. This chapter describes this profile, drawing on numerous historical examples of famous forgers to show the remarkable consistency in their biographies. It further describes how a focus on regular forensic testing of objects on the art market would be the best way to curb forgery, since almost no known forgers have bothered to create fraudulent artworks that would fool forensic tests. The fact that the art trade tends to over-rely on connoisseurship and provenance gives the advantage to the forgers, who need to pass off a good story and a reasonably good-looking work of art but one which does not need to do the “heavy lifting” of standing up to scientific tests.

Keywords

Art forgeries Fakes Art fraud Historical development of art fraud 

Bibliography

  1. Blinderman, C. (1986). The piltdown inquest. New York: Prometheus Books.Google Scholar
  2. Brewer, J. (2009). The American Leonardo. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Charney, N. (2010). Stealing the mystic lamb. New York: Perseus Books.Google Scholar
  4. Charney, N. (2015a, Spring). A field guide to British art forgers. Frieze Masters.Google Scholar
  5. Charney, N. (2015b, May 16). The art of forgery. The Times.Google Scholar
  6. Charney, N. (2015c). The art of forgery. London: Phaidon.Google Scholar
  7. Dodsley, R. (1761). London and its environs described. London: R. and J. Dodsley.Google Scholar
  8. Felch, J., & Frammolino, R. (2011). Chasing Aphrodite. New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.Google Scholar
  9. Graham, J. (2007). Inventing van Eyck. Oxford: Berg Publishers.Google Scholar
  10. Hebborn, E. (1993). Drawn to trouble. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  11. Hebborn, E. (1996). The art forger’s handbook. New York: Overlook.Google Scholar
  12. Hoving, T. (1997). False impressions. New York: Touchstone.Google Scholar
  13. Keating, T., Norman, G., & Norman, F. (1977). The fake’s progress: The Tom Keating story. London: Hutchinson and Co.Google Scholar
  14. Landesman, P. (2001, March 18). A crisis of fakes. The New York Times Magazine.Google Scholar
  15. MacGillivray, D. (2005, July 2). When is a fake not a fake? When it’s a genuine forgery. The Guardian.Google Scholar
  16. Pierce, P. (2004). The great Shakespeare fraud: The strange, true story of William-Henry Ireland. Erfurt: Sutton.Google Scholar
  17. Russell, M. (2003). Piltdown man: The secret life of Charles Dawson and the world’s greatest archaeological hoax. Stroud: The History Press.Google Scholar
  18. Salisbury, L., & Sujo, A. (2010). Provenance: How a Con Man and a Forger rewrote the history of modern art. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
  19. Stewart, D. (2010). The boy who would be Shakespeare: A tale of forgery and folly. Cambridge, MA: Da Capo Press.Google Scholar
  20. Tromp, H. (2010). A real van Gogh. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Walpole, H. (1780). Anecdotes. London: Strawberry Hills.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Noah Charney
    • 1
  1. 1.Association for Research into Crimes against ArtAmeliaItaly

Personalised recommendations