Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Archaeological forgery is the manufacture of supposedly ancient items that are sold to the antiquities market and may even end up in the collections of museums. It is related to art forgery . A string of archaeological forgeries have usually followed news of prominent archaeological excavations .
Archaeological forgeries (2 C, 55 P) Pages in category "Archaeological forgery" The following 14 pages are in this category, out of 14 total.
Archaeological forgery; Art forgery; Black propaganda — false information and material that purports to be from a source on one side of a conflict, but is actually from the opposing side; Counterfeiting. Counterfeit money — types of counterfeit coins include the cliché forgery, the fourrée and the slug; Counterfeit consumer goods ...
Forgery is a white-collar crime that generally consists of the false making or material alteration of a legal ... The Word concerns archaeological forgery, ...
Glozel Museum in 2008 Glozel Museum. French archaeological academia was dismissive of Morlet's 1925 report, published by an amateur and a peasant boy. Morlet invited a number of archaeologists to visit the site during 1926, including Salomon Reinach, curator of the National Museum of Saint-Germain-en-Laye, who spent three days excavating.
Charles Dawson (11 July 1864 – 10 August 1916) was a British amateur archaeologist who claimed to have made a number of archaeological and palaeontological discoveries that were later exposed as frauds. These forgeries included the Piltdown Man (Eoanthropus dawsoni), a unique set of bones that he claimed to have found in 1912 in Sussex. [1]
After huge publicity and further investigation, the mummy proved to be an archaeological forgery and possibly a murder victim. [3] Pregnant Mummy
I do contend, however, that it can not be proven philologically to be a modern-day forgery. I would also add that if nevertheless the YI does turn out to be a forgery, then it is a most brilliant forgery in my opinion." [9] Victor Sasson responds that "the sandstone inscription need not be the first and original record.