Defining Fakes: Detective Work and Popular Ideas of Legitimacy in French Investigations of Counterfeiters

Disguise, imitation and cheating were rampant in the early modern period. In a time when measures were not standardized, when identification papers did not include likenesses, never mind fingerprints, and when forensic science was far in the future, it was often difficult to tell the true from the false, and authorities busied themselves with designing methods to authenticate objects of value and significance. Recent studies have shown how imitation calico fabric was tightly controlled at the borders, and how wine and tobacco was checked for additives. Policemen raided homes in search of fraudulent playing cards and forged passports, investigators discovered 0s had been changed to 9s on counterfeit lottery tickets, and early experiments with fiduciary money, from goldsmiths’ notes to the assignats, were undermined by skilled forgers. Of all the various forms of falsification for profit, the counterfeiting of coins loomed large. However, while modern numismatists have an arsenal of advanced techniques at their disposal to evaluate the authenticity of 18th-century coins, contemporaries were not so fortunate.
This paper begins with the vivid portrayal of a single trial, but it draws on a large sample of investigations of counterfeiting activity in a variety of jurisdictions. Starting with public accusations, typically rich with experience and practical lore in dealing with fakes, and moving to police searches and formal reports of experts hired by the courts to examine, weigh and pierce suspect coins, the court dossiers from counterfeiting trials repeatedly confront the question of establishing truth. As authorities struggled to find evidence to prove the defendants’ guilt, they also revealed what they, themselves, thought of their own ability to make true claims.