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]