"Between Original and Reproduction:
The Art of Making Copies - from D(uchamp) to D(NA)"

The University Museum, The University of Tokyo presents:
Special Exhibition XII from collections in The University of Tokyo



(3)


LIST of EXHIBITS


Remarks:

[1] This is the list of the objects which are displayed in the exhibition "Between Original and Reproduction: The Art of Making Copies — from D(uchamp) to D(NA)" held in the University Museum, the University of Tokyo from October 20, 2001 to December 9, 2001. Due to the space allowance of the museum, some of the objects might be changed.

[2] All comments are made by Dr. NISHINO Yoshiaki, the editor of the catalogue unless specified. The English version of the catalogue is translated by TSUTSUI Yayoi and YUASA Makiko and edited by KANAZAWA Nomoe.

[3] Each object is generally explained in the order of Object Number, Artist, Title, Material, Size, Dating, and Property.
Abbreviations: UT= The University of Tokyo, UM= The University Museum

[4] Dimensions are indicated in L:length, W:width, H:height, D:depth, Dia:diameter, Wt:weight.
The unit of length is shown in centimeters.



1 Three Busts — Which is the best?

Seeming similar at first glance, these three busts are different one another with close observation. Two are bronze and one is cement- made. One of the bronze busts has a round surface and the total silhouette is soft. We will call it bronze version A. The other bronze bust has deep and sharp wrinkles and gathers. We will call it version B. We question why these three busts remain and how they are related.

The producer of these busts is HORI Shinji (b.1890-d.1978), a sculptor who worked in Taiheiyo-gakai, Bunten, Teiten, and Nitten (artists groups). He was a part-time instructor of sculpture in the Architecture Department of Faculty of Engineering, Tokyo Imperial University, and made many statues of people at this college. The model for this image was KOGANEI Yoshikiyo(b.1858-d.1944).　He was a professor of the Anatomy Department at Faculty of Medicine, Tokyo Imperial University. He was a prominent figure in the field and famous, both in Japan and abroad. His wife, Kimiko, was a sister of MORI Ogai (b.1862-d.1922), the great author. When he turned eighty years old after his retirement, this statue was made, because his former colleague, his closed friends, his pupils, and his relatives decided to give him a "Kotobuki-zo" (Celebration statue). It seems a traditional custom among the university people to honor respectable teachers' achievements. Many images of doctors such as celebration statues or memorial statues remain in the university as shown in the catalogue of Images of Doctors, the special exhibition of the University Museum, the University of Tokyo in 1998. However, it is strange that there are three like the Busts of Dr. KOGANEI.

Referring to the existence of the cement copy, the following story has been passed on around the campus. During World War II, the Imperial Japan government ordered the people to deliver metals to maintain munitions. Therefore, it is well-known that many valuable cultural assets such as statues and temples' bells were delivered and lost as they were melted into molds. In Faculty of Medicine, Tokyo Imperial University, people who wished to keep the statues made cement replicas and replaced them with the original bronzes. Thus, the bust of Dr. KOGANEI also survived. This story is also introduced in "My grandfather, KOGANEI Yoshikiyo" by HOSHI Shinichi, the grandson of Dr. KOGANEI and a novelist (published by Kawade-shobo-shinsha, 1974). These kinds of cement statues can be found among the equipments in the medical school.

On the other hand, the two bronze busts have a more complex history. Versions A and B look almost the same; however, the differences are found in the depth of the carvings and details when compared closely. In fact, Version B has a connected line on the top of the head part. On the contrary, Version A does not have it. Moreover, not only the head part but also the parts of shoulders, arms, and chests are a little different in shapes and even in the sizes which are measured with instruments. Therefore, both busts were not cast from the same mold but made from different prototypes. Why did the sculptor HORI Shinji create the two bronze sculptures that looked similar but were different?

Regarding this, HOSHI Shinichi introduced the following interesting episode in the above memoir. On December fourth of 1937, the medical school of the Imperial University held the unveiling ceremony in front of the President Nagayo and about 160 other people. At the following reception ADACHI Fumitaro (b.1865-d.1945) and HASEBE Kotondo (b.1882-d.1969), his disciples, talked with each other saying that the skull held by the image was funny. It was different from the skull which Dr. KOGANEI had always put on his desk. ADACHI stated, "That skull seems to belong not to Japanese or Ainu origin but to Chinese origin." Informed this conversation, HORI was much impressed and said," The skull in my studio came from Taiwan. I modeled it. Can you distinguish it from a Japanese one at a glance? "

Dr. KOGANEI was well known as he studied the physical anthropology on the basis of medical anatomy which he had learned in Germany. Dr. KOGANEI advocated the theory that the Paleolithic people of Japan are the Ainu on the basis of comparative ostelogic study between ancient people and modern people. He was famous for the argument with TSUBOI Shogoro (b.1868-d.1913) about the origin of the Japanese people. TSUBOI maintained that the northern people whom the Ainu called "koropokkuru" (= people under the leaves in Ainu language) in their legend would be the indigenous people. The arguments were repeated and became a topic in later. This is the background unveiling why ADACHI and HASEBE paid attentions to the shape of the skull. The sculptor HORI was told the matter and willingly agreed to remake the skull.

According to the expert of physical anthropology, the skull of Version A is poor at ostelogic understanding and has a structural problem. On the contrary, the skull of Version B has a clear joint lines and a reasonable skeleton system. Considering with the above episode, Version A was made first and Version B was made for correction. He insisted to change not only the skull but also the total image to express more minute details. He rectified the A model in detail and recast it again. However, the revised version has not been rewarded because only the original version had a chance to be unveiled in front of many people. When the war situation became worse and the medical school staff decided to prepare the cement version, HORI chose Version B without hesitation as the model of the cement.

In western culture, the iconology tells that holding a skull means "memento mori" in Latin allegorically. Here the skull with the measure shows the admirable achievement of the model, who contributed to ostelogy. It is said that HORI was inspired by a picture in which Goethe stared at a skull.

1-1 HORI Shinji (b.1890-d.1978), Bust of KOGANEI Yoshikiyo, Kotobuki (A, First & Original Version), Bronze, W:67.0, D:60.0, H:82.0, 1937(Showa 12), Department of Cell Biology and Anatomy, Graduate School of Medical Science & Faculty of Medicine, UT. "The Bust of Dr. KOGANEI Yoshikiyo Kotobuki (Celebration)" is inscribed at the front bottom, and "Showa 12nen 7gatsu by HORI Shinji" is inscribed at the side.

This bust is now installed at the landing of the staircase in the Main Building of Faculty of Medicine. Depiction of details is omitted and the whole silhouette is soft. It is criticized that rationality in ostelogy is lacked at the part of the head.

1-2 HORI Shinji： Bust of KOGANEI Yoshikiyo, Kotobuki (B, re-made version), Bronze, W:67.0, D:60.0, H:82.0, 1937(Showa 12), Graduate School of Medical Science & Faculty of Medicine, UT. "The Bust of Dr. KOGANEI Yoshikiyo Kotobuki (Celebration)" is inscribed at the front bottom, and "Showa 12nen 7gatsu by HORI Shinji" is inscribed at the side. This bust is a remake of Version A. Artistic expression of each part is progressed as well as in the features of the face and in the gathers of the clothes. Especially, the skull has rationality to satisfy the experts. Compared to Version A, the Version B became the more realistic, the more awkward as art.

1-3 HORI Shinji, Bust of KOGANEI Yoshikiyo (reproduction), cement, W:67.0, D:60.0, H:82.0, 1937(Showa 12), Department of Cell Biology and Anatomy, Graduate School of Medical Science & Faculty of Medicine, UT. "The Bust of Dr. KOGANEI Yoshikiyo Kotobuki (Celebration) is inscribed at the bottom, and "Showa 12nen 7gatsu by HORI Shinji" is inscribed at the side.

This is a reproduction with cement of Bronze B. It is suitable to recognize it as not creation but copy, imitation, and fabrication. The existence of this bust proves that replica can function instead of original.


2 Can a fake surpass an original?

Art works which are made to deceive someone are called forgeries. There are various ways to forge. The case of imitating an original in the same size does not happen so often, because the chances of being suspected will be greater if the original and the fake are put together.

The best method to distinguish a fake is to examine both displayed side by side like this. Usually the copy reveals its true nature at once. For in trying to copy faithfully, a forger's brush loses vigor. When the techniques of forgers are superior, it is more difficult to distinguish a fake. Anyway, it is rare to be shown at the same time and place like this.

2-1 TOMIOKA Tessai (b.1836-d.1924):Kukoku-kunshi-zu (Original), Hanging scroll, Ink & color on silk, 121.2 x 49.1. ca.1880, Kiyoshikojin-Seicho-ji Temple

2-2 TOMIOKA Tessai:Kukoku-kunshi-zu (Copy), Hanging scroll, Ink & color on silk, 120.2 x 48.8. ca.1880, Kiyoshikojin-Seicho-ji Temple


3 Revealed Fake.

Fabricating fake artwork requires not only professional drawing skills but also technical knowledge of art history. Expert forgers study a certain artist's original style and design in minute detail and collect characteristic motifs from several of his/her works. Then, they fabricate something like the artist's own work. Connoisseurs expose the fakes by the means of scientific detection such as X-radiography examination and bibliographical research. This is a rare example that the proprietary museum presented it to the public as a fake.

"Fake is no longer a fake when it is found. It becomes equivalent to the original, that is, original A versus original Z. Alphabet starts letter A and ends letter Z and again starts letter A. Thus, A and Z have a distance of one alphabet sequence and at the same time it is very near with each back to back. If they turn around, they can hand at once. It is a resemblance with one round distance. This is the position of a fake where the fake watches for the original from its behind," quoted from Intension of act by AKASEGAWA Genpei, 1966

3-1 Gauguin Paul (b.1848-d.1903):Portrait of a Young Woman (Fake), Oil on canvas, 46.0 x 38.2, signed and dated at lower right, Bridgestone Museum of Art, Ishibashi Foundation, with the reference photo and the X-ray photograph. This artwork has been suspected to be attributed to Gauguin. In fact several motifs are found in other art works by him. For example, the young woman's clothing and the desk behind of her at the right side resemble ones in Madame Alexandre Kohler (w.314) of 1887-1888, and a piece of pottery at the back which is believed to be Gauguin's handiwork is also shown in Still Life with Profile of Laval (w.207) of 1886. Therefore, the proprietary museum investigated with X-radiography. The X-ray results show the difference of the drawing techniques clearly. The outline of the young woman's hair is traced with something other than a brush, and white spots of unknown significance are scattered around the back of her hair and right shoulder. Moreover, the area extending from both shoulders to around the table at the bottom right is rendered with rapid brushstrokes, in a manner that is incongruous with the general style of the painting. Such an improvised method is not a technique consistent with Gauguin's known style. Among the fakes of Gauguin, there are works with false signatures which were actually drawn by other artists in a similar style and fabricated forgeries which are made using several characteristics of Gauguin style like this. (by FUTAKO Noboru)

3-2 Anonymous, The Jug on the Table (Fake), Oil on cardboard, 35.0 x 25.0, Russia, after 1990, Private collection
with the reference photo of the original <Original:POPOVA Liubov Sergeevna (b.1889-d.1924), The Jug on the Table (Plastic Painting), Oil on cardboard mounted on wood, 59.1 x 43.3, 1915, Tretyakov Gallery (TR59) in Moscow, Russia, donated by George Costakis>

The original is a bas-relief that shows progressiveness of Cubo-futurism, which flourished in pre-revolutionary Russia. It was in the collection of Costakis who had collected vast Russian avant-garde arts and now is in Tretyakov Gallery in Moscow, Russia. This copy is too immature in every point to argue that it is a fake of Popova's．However, observing it closely, we find the copyist's endeavor to catch the characteristics of the original. This copy was not produced in the presence of the original or its reproduction. Clearly every constituent of design differs from the original, even after overlooking the difficulty of transforming a bas-relief onto flat. Perhaps a sketch exists linking the original artwork and this forgery, grasping significant points connecting the two. The natural assumption of one with a tolerant attitude perceives this forgery as a kind of parody. This type of fake art has appeared frequently in the Russian market since the disintegration of the USSR. The copy illustration of the original had been introduced in an article about Russian constructivism art, which was published in the Japanese magazine "Shiso" (published by Iwanami) dated October 1922. The author of this article was Varvara Dmitrievna BUBNOVA (b.1886-d.1983) who was a friend of POPOVA and came to Japan in June of 1922. Thus, the original is familiar even to the Japanese people.

3-3 Anonymous, Drawing after the wall painting of the Last Judgment in Sistine Chapel by Michelangelo (b.1475-d.1564) (Fake), pencil on paper, Russia, after 1990, 41.5 x 32.5,
Though this sketch is framed archaically and uses faded paper to show its age, its fake nature is revealed in an unexpected way. Compared to the wall painting, the nudity, which was revealed after cleaning and restoring the picture in 1990s, is drawn in this forgery. In the original the phallic part was covered with a waistcloth before the cleaning, so such an expression was not visible. The expression of masculine from the bust to abdomen was drawn in forgery. Therefore, this "old drawing" was actually produced after the publication of the report which records the restoration.


4 Fabrication of original

"Aihagi" or "aihegi" is a highly developed technique to split one paper into two thin sheets. This special technique is used to mount thick paper into hanging-scrolls and hand scrolls. On mounting, backing paper is pasted to strengthen paper where a picture is drawn. Accordingly, the original paper gets raised and become easier to be peeled off from the backing paper because of the increased load to the paper when a thick paper is rolled. This is the reason why the original paper is processed into thin with "aihagi".

"Aihagi" technique is also applied to restore the damage of the paper where the letters are inscribed at both sides. Usually, to restore moth-eaten or burned paper, it is reinforced by patting and backing with adding paper or filling paper fiber at the part of the damage. However, when this method is applied to double-sided paper, backed paper covers one side. To avoid this, using "aihagi" technique and splitting the paper, paper for reinforcement is put between two layers. This method is called "naka-uchi"(centering) and was applied to restore the script Meigetsuki of the Reizei Family. These days, libraries use the restoration technique based on the same theory which is introduced from Eastern Europe. This method is called "paper split". The "aihagi" method is also used when old manuscripts or letters are mounted into hanging- scrolls.

After the "aihagi" method is applied, a lower layer of the paper remains with design. It is called "aihagi-bon". To make an "aihagi-bon", pigment should be soaked into the lower layer. Paper fiber varies in its texture. The more coarse the texture is, the more pigment sinks. The quality of pigment also influences. For example, pigment like natural mineral color has too rough in particle to sink and stick on the surface, so an "aihagi-hon" cannot be made. Only ink and light-coloring paint can soak into the lower layer and are suitable to make "aihagi". Paper coated with alum solution to avoid blotting is not suitable to make "aihagi". Though splitting paper into two layers is theoretically possible anytime, difficulty of splitting occurs depending on types of paper. For instance, there are papers with long fibers such as those of papers with short fibers such as wood tips or euonymus. Paper fiber consists of cellulose, which is too strong to break. Long fiber paper is difficult to split.

As mentioned above, to make "aihagi-bon" paper should be short in fiber to split easily and coarse in texture. So the ink should be asorbed easily. "Gyokubansen" is a type of paper which TOMIOKA Tessai, early modern literary artist, favored. Satisfying all these conditions, "gyokubansen" is high quality paper for calligraphy and drawings which has been produced in Xuanzhou, Anhui of China. It is easily blotted with ink and thick and strong enough to contain absorb ink. Artists like Tessai who use a brush soaked with ink have valued it. Not only Tessai but also many other literary artists use "gyokubansen". For example, KISHIDA Ryusei used it for his ink or light colored paper works. However, using "gyokubansen" is not all round to make "aihagi-bon". Because vermilion ink of an artist's seal cannot soak the paper deeply, the part of the seal should be forged. The part where the ink does not sink through should be filled. As a matter of fact, Kannontaishi-zo by TOMIOKA Tessai, which is "aihagi-bon" of Fudarakusan-Kanzeonbosatsu-zo, has a forged seal and supplementary brush touch. Making "aihagi" is not as simple as splitting paper into two slices, generates another original. (by HAYAKAWA Akihiro)

4-1 TOMIOKA Tessai, Fudarakusan-Kanzeonbosatsu-zo, Hanging scroll, slight-color on paper, 146.5 x 40.0, 1920 (Taisho-9), Kiyoshikojin-Seicho-ji Temple 〈1〉
An original work of art on a sheet of paper can be sliced into two layers and then, under a certain condition, sometimes it appears as two "original" works of art. Naturally, the lower layer is lighter in color, however the design is the same. To value only the upper layer is nothing but fetishistic favoritism. It is rare opportunity to see both upper and lower layer "aihagi-bon" from one original.

4-2 TOMIOKA Tessai, Kannon-Taishi-zo, Hanging scroll, slight-color on paper H:134.3 x W:40.1, 1920 (Taisho-9), Kiyoshi-kojin-seicho-ji (Temple) 〈2〉;
The false seal is stamped and additional paint is shown.

4-3 HANDA Tatsuji & KINOSHITA Chiharu, A sample of Aihagi-bon, specially prepared for this exhibition
"Aihagi" is splitting paper thinly into two. Usually it is done necessarily to make it thin when artworks on thick paper are mounted. "Aihagi" is also applied to restore the damaged double-sided paper by inserting a paper for reinforcement (nakauchi). Under a certain condition, ink soaks through the lower layer and when split into two sheets the same design appears on the lower layer. There is an example of using it with an added seal and showing as if it were an original. This is called "aihagi-bon" or "hikoki".

4-4 HAYAKAWA Akihiro, 10 Samples of Aihagi, (Under the direction of HANDA Tatsuji)
The paper consists of piled and tingled fibers of plants. The paper split separates the fibers' combination. Thus, theoretically any paper can be split. Length of fibers varies depending on the plant material. The longer the fibers are, the stronger the combination of fibers is connected. Therefore, it is difficult to split longer fiber paper.

4-5 HAYAKAWA Akihiro, a Sample of soaked ink
Mineral pigment for Japanese style drawings cannot sink into paper, because its particles are rough. Ink and light-coloring pigment are easy to sink because its particles are fine. The amount of soaked ink depends on the thickness of fibers. The paper for "aihagi" should be coarse to blot into the lower layer. Laminated paper like "dosahiki" cannot be blotted.


5 The copy is the royal road of pictorial arts.


Copying classical pictures has been considered the best way to learn picturing all over the world since ancient times. Therefore, the pictorial art academy as an educational system of art has been connected with art collections somehow. In fact an educational program of the academy consists of curriculums in which the students proceed to copy classical pictures by grade. Copying them leads not only to the understanding of forms and learning designs, but also to the study of picturing techniques which becomes the means to develop a new pictorial expression. In fact, FUJITA Yoshika (b.1929-d.1999), who made these copies, broke fresh ground in Japanese Art by using ideas from the western styles and techniques. Usually, copies for study are done with the proprietary museums' permission and the copies are made in a size different from the original to avoid confusion.

5-1 FUJITA Yoshika, Copy of Predella of the Annunciation Altarpiece by Fra Angelico (b.1387-d.1455) in the Prado Museum, copy in the same size, painted on board, 25.5 x 39.0, frame 45.0 x 57.8, 1963 (Showa 38), the College Art Museum, College of Arts and Sciences, UT
There is an inscription on the reverse side "in the Prado Museum, Madrid, Spain, copy of Fra Angelico's Annunciation by FUJITA Yoshika from August to October of 1963 ".

5-2 FUJITA Yoshika, almost natural size copy of the Right Wing "Hell" of the Triptyque the Garden of Earthly Delight by Hieronymus Bosch (b.c1450-d.1516) in the Prado Museum, Madrid, Spain, Tempera on panel, 34.5 x 39.0 (Frame size 42.0 x 57.8), 1963 (Showa 38), the College Art Museum, College of Arts and Sciences, UT

5-3 FUJITA Yoshika, Copy of Saint Eroi in Orfevrie Workshop by Taddeo Gaddi in the Prado Museum, Madrid, Spain, Tempera on panel, H:34.5 x W:39.0 (Frame size H:53.0 x W:57.8), 1963 (Showa 38), the College Art Museum, College of Arts and Sciences, UT


6 Chronology by high technology

Radiocarbon dating has been often used in the field of Paleolithic Anthropology and Archaeology. Nowadays we have a rich store of accumulated data. Thus, it is possible to apply this dating method to recent eras with a certain amount of accuracy. As the accuracy of analysis depends on each specimen and the circumstances of conservatory condition, radiocarbon dating can conclude almost correctly on first decision of fakes fabricated later.

6-1 Statue of a Man, wood, H84.0, Dynasty 12, Egypt, 18th century B.C., Bridgestone Museum of Art, Ishibashi Foundation
This artwork has been questioned as a fake. However, the radiocarbon age indicates the wood material dates back to around 1950 B.C. It seems that the Egyptian statue of a man was curving in the round. By X-ray radiography,it was proven that the wood carving had been composed of parts of 9-10 piece. Plates of the front and the back are being joined together by tenon and adhesive. By the energy-dispersible X-ray fluorescence (EDXRF), the adhesive material seems to be ordinary plaster. Other than a new metal sprig on the lower right of the statue, no marks made by later hands are found. This statue is under perfect, preserved condition as an ancient heritage. (by NISHINO Yoshiaki, YOSHIDA Kunio, and USHINO Tsuyoshi)

6-2 Head of Jesus-Christ, Sculpture on wood, Northern France, W:28.5, D:26.5, H35.0, 14th century, Registered as "No.29, Ishibashi Family", Bridgestone Museum of Art, Ishibashi Foundation
As a result of the C-14 dating analysis, the wood material is proved to date only back to 1850-1900. The surface of the sculpture is almost mistaken for a wood carving in late medieval ages because of its old color. It seems to have faded after exposure to outside circumstance for a long time. Moreover, a big crack is found at a noticeable part. This is thought that there was not enough time spent to dry the wood. From the aspect of carving skills, the point of the chisel looks rather newer than that of medieval age, through observation of the track of carving at the hair part.

The tilting head is frequently found in crucifixion themes of the medieval age. In crucifixion, Jesus is usually drawn with the thorny crown on the head. From this point of view, the sculpture has an unnatural expression of the head part. At the bottom of this sculpture the evidence of cutting by a saw-like tool is found. The cut was not done perpendicularly but angled for the head to tilt a little. Therefore, the crucified Jesus looks more in pain. Whatever cannot make this sculpture unworthy on its artistic value, for the sculpture is good enough for appreciation as the 19th century wood carve with orthodox methods. (by NISHINO Yoshiaki and YOSHIDA Kunio)

6-3 African Sculpture, wood carving, H:54.0, unknown provenance, 19th century

6-4 Asian Goddess, wood, W:10.0, D:18.5, H:68.5, unknown provenance, mid-19th century
Probably this is the head figure for the bow of a ship. The material is tropical but hard wood.

6-5 Buddha (?), wood, H:44.0, Japan, End of 19th century

6-6 School of Veneto-Byzantine, Virgin and Child, Oil/Tempera on wood panel, 25.0 x 19.5, Northern Italy, mid-15th century
The study of art history determined that this artwork was made in the 1420s from the comparable analysis of styles and designs and altered to repair damages in early 16th century when the frame was made. However, the results of radiocarbon dating and optical analysis confirmed that it could date back to the middle of the 15th century and the basic material is northern wood which have more than hundred annual rings. Moreover, X-ray radiographic analysis indicates the existence of a rough sketch under the painting. Therefore, this painting is not produced with the stereotype method using cartons.

6-7 Single Leaf from a prayer book, illuminated manuscript on velum, 39.3 x 26.0, France, ca.1360,
Single leaf of a medieval prayer book can be analyzed with X-ray Fluorescence Spectroscopy to specify its components. As the result of analysis, gall ink is used at the part of letters. Gall ink is made of gall, which is a abnormal swelling of plant tissue, and iron (II) sulfate hydrations (FeSO4・7H2O), for mixture of them generates black ink with tannin as the catalyst, diluted with Arabian rubber. Rubric is called miniature from minium, that is, cinnabar or red-orange lead pigment. In this case, letters are written by cinnabar, chemical compound of mercury sulfide (HgS). Initial, an ornamental letter part is written with copper(II) hydroxide carbonate (CuCO3・Cu(OH)2) in blue and gold leaf in golden color. Red color part is different from vermilion letter. It is presumed made of lead (Pb3O4) and organic red pigment. Recently, Dead Sea Scrolls are also analyzed by resemble methods. Our research confirmed the result of them at the part of rubric and black letters. It also confirmed that production of manuscripts, which started in the east coast of ancient Mediterranean Sea, had not been changed during more than a thousand years at the basis. (by NISHINO Yoshiaki and YOSHIDA Kunio)

6-8 20 Inscribed Bamboo Slips (Fake), Bamboo, L:30.0, Private collection
These are inscribed bamboo slips of ″ Chu in 4th century B.C., excavated from modern Hubei province in China", which were circulated vastly through Japan, Taiwan, and Hong Kong in 1995. These kinds of bamboo slips were circulated throughout as the number of more than thousands in various routes. Many people purchased them from several slips to hundreds or thousands. Their authenticity was questioned because of the quantity, and scientific detection was requested. The C-14 Dating Laboratory of the University Museum, the University of Tokyo (Director:Dr. Kunio YOSHIDA) examined three types of them, which came from the Osaka route circulated at first, from an art dealer in Tokyo, and from the Hong Kong route. The result showed that there is no difference in dating between these three specimens and the comparable specimen which were bamboo sticks of yakitori in modern Tokyo. In addition, the letters inscribed on the bamboo slips seems to be copied from the bamboo slips unearthed from the Baoshan tomb, and some errors in the copying process are found. To make it appear like original, statements are quoted from the parts including zodiac years. Therefore, these bamboo slips are definitely considered fake due to its materials and inscriptions. (by YOSHIDA Kunio)


7 From the replica to the genuine original

Prehistoric and modern bifaces - Can you tell the five prehistoric bifaces?

Among the displayed objects, one plastic model is included. Besides it, all of them are capable of use as stone artifacts. Both the unearthed objects with fair identification and the modern replica or models are used in observation of shapes and well accepted as the materials for educational purpose. The stone artifacts are classified according to the unit of thousands or millions of years. In spite of the difference in the reason or motivation of production, old ones and contemporary ones must be identified as the genuine stone artifacts thousands of years later. Here it is difficult to find an essential difference between originals and copies. There are five genuine bifaces. Is it possible to distinguish them from the others?

7-1 Hand-axe, Flint, Latmne, Syria, ca.700, 000BP, L:16.5, Department of Anthropology and Prehistory, UMUT

7-2 Biface, Obsidian, USA, Replicated by Pictures os Records Co., L:18.5, Nishiaki Collection

7-3 Biface, Obsidian, Shirataki in Hokkaido, Japan, ca. 150,000 B.P., and L:18.4, Department of Archaeology, Faculty of Letters, UT

7-4 Hand-axe, Flint, France, Replicated by a souvenir shop in Les Eyzies, L:15.8, Nishiaki Collection

7-5 Replica of a point in Arbreda cites, Spain, ca. 180,000 BP, Plastic replicated by Museu Arqueologic Comarcal de Banyoles, L:12.9, Nishiaki collection

7-6 Point, Obsidian, Hokkaido, replicated by MATSUZAWA Tsugio, L:12.2, Private collection

7-7 Hand-axe, Flint, Syria, Replicated by OHNUMA Katsuhiko, L:18.5, Department of Curatorial Studies, UMUT

7-8 Hand-axe, Flint, Palmyra, Syria, ca. 300,000BP, L:15.6, Department of Curatorial Studies, UMUT

7-9 Hand-axe, Flint, Syria, Replicated by OHNUMA Katsuhiko, L:15.8, Department of Curatorial Studies, UMUT

7-10 Hand-axe, Flint, Palmyra, Syria, ca. 300,000BP, L:12.6, Department of Curatorial Studies, UMUT

7-11 Hand-axe, Flint, Palmyra, Syria, ca. 300,000BP, L:12.2, Department of Prehistory, UMUT

7-12 Waste flakes from replication of the hand-axe 7-7, Flint flakes, Department of Prehistory, UMUT
Replication of the hand-axe no.7 produced as many as 84,000 waste flakes, including minute chips and powders. One mass of flint was crushed into from a big piece to minute powders of 84,000 waste flakes. The attitude to study of the experimental archaeologist, who tried to understand its making process, usage, and shape deeply, is common with one of an artist who tries to understand by copying masterpieces.


8 What is the replica of "Fabricated Paleolithic Stone Artifacts"?

Items are reproduced and incidents are restored or represented. However, such reproductions are sometimes accused depending on account of the purpose or intention. Fabrication of planting stone artifacts at two Paleolithic sites has been sensational as a big scandal in Japanese society and damaged the dignity of Japanese Archaeologists. The influence of the incident is equivalent to the Piltdown man in England, which is famous in all over the world for identified as a hoax later. Not only the replica of the stone artifacts used to plant, which are probably real stone artifacts in the Jomon era, but also the replica of the false archaeological site itself is conserved. Such a hoax, replica, reproduction, restoration, and representation consist of a complicated sequence of copies. This is difficult to understand from the view of original versus copy dualism.

8-1 Replica of 6 Bifaces from Kami-Takamori, L; 10.0, National Museum of Japanese History
The revelation of the hoax in the 2000 season cast a serious doubt on the veracity of these finds, once reported in 1995 as the oldest stone tools ever found in Japan, nearly 600,000 years ago. Many archaeologists now believe their derivation from the Jomon period going back only 15,000 to 2,000 years. (by NISHIAKI Yoshihiro)

Once reliability to the original is lost, its replica's academic value is also lost. Anyhow, as the evidence of the hoax, it has a little value not to forget it.

8-2 The cover and article from the Mainichi dated November 5,2000, which scooped the fabrication at Kami-Takamori site and titled "Dirty Digger Unearthed"
The hoax was first exposed by an investigation team of Mainichi Shimbun (Mainichi Newspaper), who caught an archaeologist on video planting stone artifacts at the Kami-Takamori site, Miyagi Prefecture, in the early morning of October 22. The artifacts were later excavated and claimed by himself at a press conference to date over 700,000 years ago. He confessed his fabrication to the investigation team on November 4. (by NISHIAKI Yoshihiro)

8-3 Replica of the Piltdown skull, plaster, UMUT
This is a replica of Dawson's 'associated' prehistoric finds from the Piltdown.


9 Slight Difference between Replica and Fake

In archaeological relic there is no essential difference between replica and fake. However, if replica made for academic study or reproduction made as souvenirs are sold as original, they are fakes. "The matter what copied the original and imitated it is a model or fake depends on if its function and social value is open to public or hidden from the public. If a real size wooden airplane without engine is sold as an airplane, it is a fake. On the other hand, if it is sold as an airplane which cannot fly, it is a model. (Trade is a necessary relationship. Only the relationship between the objects and us in trade situation shows the difference of original and fake. Just watching the wooden airplane without engine far from the trade, it is merely "an wooden airplane without engine",″ quoted from stillborn counterfeit by AKASEGAWA Genpei, 1969. This is the simplest case. How do we evaluate restored artifacts which include the originals as the parts of them? In fact, among the elaborate fakes we can find a lot of original parts as the components. Especially, there are fakes consisting all original parts and as a whole never existing in real.

9-1 Bowl (partly original), Clay, Tall-I-Gap, Iran, ca. 4000B.C., H:12.5, Dia:23.3, Department of Archaeology of Western Asia, UMUT
This was restored with plaster in 1960s, and colored it based on the model in 2000. Thus, for the restored part, the relationship of the original and the model has reversed.

9-2 Replica of Bowl (9-1), Clay, 1960s, H:12.5, Dia:23.3, Department of Archaeology of Western Asia, UMUT
Parts of the original had been virtually restored. Since the model includes the restored parts, it can hardly be said as the genuine model of the 'original'.

9-3 Replica of a Tumbler found at Tall-I-Gap site (ca. 4000 B.C.), Iran, H:22.0, Dia:16.0. 1960s, Department of Archaeology of Western Asia, UMUT, Original:Iran National Museum
The original was unearthed by the expedition team of the University of Tokyo. After brought to Japan and produced replica for academic study, it was returned to Iran National Museum in Tehran. Looking at it carefully, the glaze has been into cracks and restored parts, which are not supposed to be there. It shows that it is a replica.

9-4 Replica of a Tumbler found at Tall-I-Gap site (ca. 4000 B.C.), Iran, H:16.0, Dia:12.2, 1960s, Department of Archaeology of Western Asia, UMUT, Original:Iran National Museum

9-5 Replica of a Beaked Vessel found at Ghalekuti Site (ca. 1000B.C.), Iran, H:13.6, Dia:30.8, 1960s, Department of Archaeology of Western Asia, UMUT, Original:Iran National Museum
The original is located in Iran National Museum. It seems to be made as a model for academic study. It hardly happens that such a special shaped vessel is unearthed without cracks and the surface is too smooth. Therefore, the experts concluded it as a reproduction.

9-6 Bowl (partially original), Clay, Telul eth-Thalathat Site (ca.5000B.C.), Iraq, H:5.7, Dia:17.1, Department of Archaeology of Western Asia, UMUT
This was restored with plaster in 1960s. Because the original part was small, it has been left uncolored. Once too much energy is poured into restoration, over-restoration is trapping. In spite of 10-20% original part, can we call it a genuine original?

9-7 Bowl (partially original), Clay, Telul eth-Thalathat Site (ca.5000B.C.), Iraq, H:5.3, D:8.7, Department of Archaeology of Western Asia, UMUT
Though this was restored with plaster in 1960s, it has been left uncolored.

9-8 Stone Vessel (partially original), Stone, Telul eth-Thalathat Site (ca.5000BC), Iraq, H:8.3, Dia:10.3, Department of Archaeology of Western Asia, UMUT
This was restored with plaster in 1960s, and it has been left uncolored. Though it is also an example of over-restoration, we respect the imaginative and creative ability of the scholars who constructed such a vessel shape from quite small fragments.


10 CT images are useful to examine the genuineness of the artworks

Thanks to remarkable progress of the latest technology, various methods are developed in the field of scientific detection. Historic cultural assets have been examined on the basis of experiential judgment by the experts. Scientific detection using technologic equipments can be applied to these things. Here the three-dimensional images by CT (Computed Axial Tomography) Scanner reveal the inner structure of specimens and procedure of assembling. Works identified as original are made of pottery soil pressed amazingly thin and attained with artistry hands. (by NISHINO Yoshiaki, SUWA Gen, YOSHIDA Kunio, and USHINO Tsuyoshi)

10-1 Stirrup-spout Bottle (partially lacked), Ceramic, Cupisnique Culture, North Coast of Peru, 1200-1800B.C., Department of Cultural Anthropology, College of Arts and Sciences, UT
Both appearance and inside of its shape realized perfect symmetry. How the ancient Peruvian realized such thin and hard potter with clay?

10-2 Stirrup-spout Bottle, Fake for an artifact of Cupisnique Culture, North Coast of Peru, around 1200-1800B.C., ceramic, Peru, 1980s, H:24.0 Dia:13.0 Department of Cultural Anthropology, School of Arts and Sciences, UT
According to the CT scanning image, it was constructed in order of body, bottom, handle, and neck parts after molding each part. This method leaves marks at the joint parts and makes each thickness uneven. It is confirmed that the original was not made by this method.

10-3 Long- necked Bottle, Fake for an artifact of Cupisnique Culture, North Coast of Peru around 1200-800BC, Ceramic, Peru, 1980s, H:23.5, Dia:16.5 Department of Cultural Anthropology, School of Arts and Sciences, UT

A lot of crafty fakes are dealt as the artifacts of the Andean Civilization. The absence of objective criteria makes it difficult to distinguish the fakes from the genuine pieces. Three ceramic bottles with stylistic features of the Middle Formative Period (1200-800 B.C.) or the Late Formative Period (800-250 B.C.) were analyzed with "X-ray CT". The "X-ray CT" realizes observation of the inner shape of chambers and spouts of the bottles without destruction. According to the data of scientifically excavated bottles of the Formative Period, it is assumed that a specific procedure of constructing was preferred by the potters at that time. A few clay parts were piled up, basically from the base to the spout. The technique of molds, which applied in the later periods, was not utilized. The result of X-ray CT analysis clarified that two of three pieces of the bottles have vertical lines of junction inside the chamber, caused by the molds. It is concluded that these pieces must be fakes. (by TSURUMI Eisei)

10-4 Stirrup-spout Bottle, Fake for an artifact of Moche Culture, North Coast of Peru around 1-800A.D., Ceramic, Peru, H:22.0, W:13.0, present, Department of Cultural Anthropology, College of Arts and Sciences, UT
It is one of fakes mass-produced for foreign tourists.

10-5 Composite Jar, Fake for an artifact of Chancay Culture, Central Coast of Peru around 1200-1450A.D., Ceramic, Peru, H:15.0, Dia:16.0, Department of Cultural Anthropology, School of Arts and Sciences, UT
It is one of fakes mass-produced for foreign tourists.

10-6 Long-necked Jar, Fake for an artifact of Chancay Culture, Central Coast of Peru around 1200-1450A.D., Ceramic, Peru, H:14.0 Dia:10.0, present, Department of Cultural Anthropology, College of Arts and Sciences, UT
It is one of fakes mass-produced for foreign tourists.

10-7 Composite Jar, Fake for an artifact of Chimu Culture, North Coast of Peru around 1200-1450A.D., Ceramic, Peru, H:112.0, Dia:15.0, Department of Cultural Anthropology, College of Arts and Sciences, UT
It is one of fakes mass-produced for foreign tourists.

10-8 Zenon GALLEGOS, Composite Jar, Replica for an artifact of Naska Culture, South Coast of Peru, Ceramic, Peru, 1998, H:12.0 D:10.5, Private collection
We visited the ceramic artists including Zenon Gallegos in Nazca located on the southern coast of Peru in 1998. In this area, archaeological artifacts such as polychrome pottery or textiles were excavated. As the value of them are recognized. Robbers and forgers appear to make money, targeting the collectors. We interviewed two artists, who are difterent from those forgers. They manufactured replica of Nazca pottery and research it enthusiastically. The artists try to reproduce not only the appearance but also materials and the method as ancient Nazca people did. They would like to contribute to the archaeological study on Nazca through their business. (by TSUJI Yoshiko)



前頁へ   |   表紙に戻る   |   次頁へ