%0 Journal Article
%T The Consequences of Truth
%A Karin Westin Tikkanen
%J Bulletin of the History of Archaeology
%D 2012
%I Ubiquity Press
%R 10.5334/bha.22113
%X Authenticity debates and charges of fraud are not infrequent within the world of archaeology. Depending on the importance of a chosen object, such discussions may reach the level and quality of courtroom rhetoric. Accusations may be hurled, back and forth, through scholarly chambers, and the question of guilt if the object is proven a fraud may be debated, fiercely, with or without considerable proof on either side. This article discusses the reception of two inscriptions, from late nineteenth century until the current date: the Latin Fibula Praenestina, from Praeneste (modern Palestrina), Italy, and the Kensington Rune Stone, from Kensington, Minnesota, USA. The fibula is said to date to the early seventh century BC, and the runic inscription itself mentions the date ¡°1362¡±. However, shortly after their discovery, both of these inscriptions were accused of being forgeries. Their importance would be significant if they could be proven to be authentic. And yet there is continuing debate about their authenticity and their value to scholarship.
%K Latin
%K fibula praenestina
%K Old Swedish
%K Kensington Rune Stone
%U http://archaeologybulletin.uplabs1.com/article/view/496