We don't generally authenticate or appraise, but we do identify.  Part of
our defined role is to serve as a resource for the public, but at least
within a natural history context that's generally putting a name to the
bird at someone's feeder or releasing the odd corn snake that's been
brought in as poisonous.  Those kinds of identifications rarely involve
"authentication" (except for pileated woodpeckers dosed with white-out to
look like ivory-bills--but I don't want to go into another discussion of
white-out).
 
In archaeology, however, authentication becomes a bit more of an issue.
For the most part I dodge the authenticity question by identifying an
object's *style* while laying authenticity at the feet of provenience.  I
identify the style, then disavow any opinion regarding authenticity
without full knowledge of the context and provenience.  In some respects, at
least, that's what I'd really be "authenticating."
 
Our code of ethics, by the way, not only prohibits our offering appraisals
without prior approval of the Director, it also prohibits us recommending
an outside appraiser unless we can recommend more than two.
 
 
Alex Barker
Curator of Archaeology
Dallas Museum of Natural History
[log in to unmask]