The Project Gutenberg eBook of Forgers and Forgeries, by William George Constable
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this eBook.
Title: Forgers and Forgeries
Author: William George Constable
Release Date: March 04, 2021 [eBook #64686]
Language: English
Character set encoding: UTF-8
Produced by: Stephen Hutcheson and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net
*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK FORGERS AND FORGERIES ***

> ON THE COVER PAGES
> A forgery of a Greek bronze statuette (BACK COVER), and a genuine example (FRONT COVER). Such “type” forgeries are exceptionally difficult to detect. Probably made for the tourist trade.

Retail Price $1.00

# FORGERS
and
FORGERIES

BY W. G. Constable
CURATOR OF PAINTINGS
MUSEUM OF FINE ARTS, BOSTON

ART TREASURES OF THE WORLD
NEW YORK AND TORONTO

ART TREASURES OF THE WORLD

100 SIXTH AVENUE, NEW YORK 13, N. Y.

IN CANADA: 1184 CASTLEFIELD AVENUE

TORONTO 10, ONTARIO

Printed in U. S. A. AT14 W

Copyright 1954 by Harry N. Abrams, Incorporated. Copyright in the United States and foreign countries under International Copyright Convention. All rights reserved under Pan-American Convention. No part of the contents of this book may be reproduced without the written permission of Harry N. Abrams, Incorporated. Printed in U.S.A.

5

The usual idea of a forgery is of something deliberately fabricated to appear to be what it is not; something conceived in sin, and carrying the taint of illegitimacy throughout its existence. In fact, however, many things made for quite innocent and even laudable purposes have been used to deceive and to defraud, by means of misrepresentation or subsequent manipulation. So the essential element in forgery lies in the way an object is presented, rather than in the purpose that inspired its making.

Still, it is objects made to deceive which have always held the center of the stage. Without doubt, the main motive for their manufacture is to make money. But often there is an element of drama, even of romance, in the way they come into existence. A famous example is a Sleeping Cupid which the young Michelangelo is supposed have carved in imitation of the work of classical antiquity and which, after being buried in the ground, was bought by a dealer and sold as an antique, being rated as such until its true origin was revealed. Though the element of deceit was present from the beginning, the primary purpose of the work was a challenge to the past; and it is significant that Michelangelo’s early biographers counted the success of the imposition to 6 his credit, since it proved that he could successfully rival the sculptors of Greece and Rome.

Such challenges to the past have undoubtedly inspired men who were or ultimately became professional forgers. This seems to have been the case with Giovanni Bastianini (1830-1868), the Italian sculptor. His admiration for early Renaissance Italian sculpture bred in him a spirit of rivalry which issued in the production of remarkable imitations to be exploited as originals through collaboration with a dealer. Alceo Dossena (1878-1937) also seems to have wanted to prove himself the equal of earlier sculptors, though later he knowingly embarked on the making of forgeries of medieval and Renaissance Italian sculpture, skillful enough to be purchased as originals by various museums. The case for conscious rivalry with the past is clearer with Rouchomovski, the nineteenth-century goldsmith, whose abilities, though sufficient to give him a reputation in his own right, led him to make the famous tiara of Saitaphernes, which was purchased by the Louvre as Greco-Scythian work of the third century B.C.

With other forgers, however, desire to confound connoisseurs and the learned world has been uppermost, generally bred by neglect or adverse criticism. So it seems to have been with Thomas Chatterton and his eighteenth-century imitations of medieval poems; perhaps it operated in the case of T. J. Wise and his forgeries of nineteenth-century pamphlets; and apparently I. F. Ioni, the Sienese painter and restorer, well-known for his forgeries of Italian primitive paintings, derived at least as much satisfaction from trying to take in eminent authorities as from the money he made. Certainly such motives inspired H. A. Van Meegeren, the most famous forger of our time. Van Meegeren, a dexterous painter, skillful in imitating others, did not receive the recognition to which he felt his gifts entitled him, and turned his talents to forging the great Dutch masters of the seventeenth century. In 1937 he achieved spectacular success with his sale to the Rotterdam museum for $200,000 of his Disciples at Emmaus, as an early work by Jan Vermeer. A vivid light is thrown on his motives by a remark he made in 1947 after his arrest and trial: “The Disciples represented the master-stroke in my plan for vengeance.” Later, the desire to fill his pockets seems to have become paramount. A similar case may be that of the Piltdown skull, once thought to be the earliest surviving relic of prehistoric man. Recent intensive examination has proved that though the 7 cranium is of respectable antiquity, the lower jaw is that of a chimpanzee doctored to appear ancient; and there is some reason to think that it was made and planted near where the cranium was found, by a disgruntled museum technician who wished to prove that he could fool the learned world.

LEFT: A forgery by Giovanni Bastianini, part copy and part style imitation. RIGHT: A fragment of an original relief by Desiderio da Settignano on which the forgery was based.

But whatever mixture of motives may go into making a forgery, the predominant one is almost always financial gain. It follows that what the forger makes is mainly determined by the market for his goods, which in turn depends on current activity among collectors and in the learned world. In the Middle Ages, fantastic curiosities and saintly relics were much in demand, and forgers saw to it that the supply was kept up. Later, the growth of scientific knowledge and religious skepticism spoiled this market; while recognition of the artist as an individual and the development of art collections stimulated production of forgeries imitating the work of particular artists or of particular epochs. These have since been the staple of the forger’s trade, reflecting the tastes of the day. The eighteenth-century collectors’ passion for classical antiquity helped to sustain in Rome a flourishing industry for the supply of classical statues and gems, with Thomas Jenkins, painter, art agent, and banker as one of its leading figures; English Regency taste produced a fine crop of imitations of Sèvres and Meissen porcelain, made both in England and elsewhere; the Gothic revival, bringing in its train a new enthusiasm for Italian primitives, created hitherto neglected opportunities for the forger, who maintained an active sideline in keeping up the supply of Palissy ware and Italian majolica, until the taste of the aesthetic period turned his attention to Delft ware; and in our own time we have seen the forger swing from fabricating Famille Rose and Famille Verte to meeting twentieth-century demands for the art of the T’ang, Sung, and earlier Chinese dynasties.

8

ABOVE: An example of a flourishing nineteenth-century industry: a forgery of a fourteenth-century Italian diptych, with (BELOW) a genuine example for comparison. The crackle and facial types indicate the forgery.

9
10

Just as he responds to changes in taste or in learned activity, so the forger follows in the footsteps of the tourist, for whom he has provided flint implements to be discovered in prehistoric sites; Greek and Roman coins, gems, and statuettes at appropriate places in Italy, Greece, and Asia Minor; scarabs and small sculpture in Egypt; and today, pottery and figurines in Central and South America.

Nor does the forger confine his attentions to the art of the past, but extends them to contemporary work. Constable and Corot were imitated while they were still living; forgeries of Renoir, Degas, Picasso, Matisse, and others are common today; while, among Americans, Winslow Homer and Ryder fabrications circulate freely. Artists are apt to be forgetful as to what they have produced, especially in the case of sketches, and have been known to deny authorship of perfectly genuine work; so that risks of confrontation are not too great. With a contemporary artist recently dead, his work not yet fully known or catalogued, a vogue for collecting him fanned by a skillful entrepreneur, prices not so high as to provoke critical examination, and with not too many genuine examples accessible for comparison, the forger is in velvet.

The two main methods of making forgeries, manufacture and misrepresentation, are in practice often combined; but it is convenient to discuss them separately. The simplest type of manufactured forgery is the straight copy, although this has considerable disadvantages. In addition to the necessity of choosing the right materials, imitating the right technique, and giving a proper appearance of age, the risks of confrontation with the original are great in these days of systematic combing of collections, aided by swift and easy travel, by photography and widespread publication. Sometimes, the forger attempts to meet this risk of confrontation by introducing variations into a design, so that the forgery may pass as a version of the original. But even so, comparison of the two is almost inevitable, with the almost equally inevitable exposure of any defects in the copy. It is this risk that makes forgers prefer to copy objects that are types rather than those stamped with the individuality of some particular master. The strictly controlled design and iconography of much Byzantine painting, and its 11 standardized technique, encourages modern repetition; and the putting of one more copy on the market is not in itself likely to arouse suspicion. Similarly, the fact that eighteenth-century Chinese potters paid homage to those of earlier dynasties by making most admirable copies of their work, confuses the situation in favor of the forger. Another advantage (to the forger) of such objects is that many of them can be reproduced by casting. With some knowledge of the materials used for the originals and some skill in giving an appearance of age, such things as Chinese grave figures, Greek or Near Eastern bronzes, and coins can be produced in quantity. Sometimes, indeed, variation in the material of the cast is an aid to deception; as in the case of Renaissance bas-reliefs, when a cast in wax or stucco may, after some manipulation, be passed off as a sketch for a marble original.

ABOVE: A forgery of Vermeer by Van Meegeren, purporting to be an early work of the artist, purchased as an original, compared with (BELOW) the earliest known painting signed by Vermeer.

More common than straight copies of particular objects, however, are imitations of the style of some period or master. This avoids the risk of comparison with a more or less identical original, and helps in passing off the forgery as an unknown example of the style it imitates. It was on this basis that Bastianini, Rouchomovski, and Dossena worked, as did the German painter Roerich in his 12 imitations of Cranach and other early German masters. Usually such imitations of a style do not embody a new conception or an original idea; for the most part they consist of borrowings from original works, pieced together to make a more or less consistent whole. Often, these borrowings are secondhand, being taken from photographs, engravings, or reproductions in books. A specific case was the use of Weisser’s Bilderatlas zur Weltgeschichte (1882) by Rouchomovski for the reliefs on the tiara of Saitapharnes. The use of such models is, however, the Achilles’ heel of the forger. Once their source is tracked down, detection of the imposture is almost certain.

A forgery of fourteenth-century Italian wood sculpture by Dossena.

An X-ray revealed modern nails in the interior.

That, perhaps, is why forgers have on occasion virtually abandoned the use of models, either wholly or in part, and produced objects different from anything that is known, but which could fit into some particular historical or cultural background. Here, they are exploiting not only ignorant enthusiasm but 13 the desire among the learned to extend knowledge of little-known epochs of human history, or to find material that will justify theories about them. Comparatively crude examples are the so-called Baphomets, stone figures said to have been worshipped by the Knights Templar; and the “medieval” pilgrim’s badges made in nineteenth-century London by William Smith and Charles Eaton, now widely known as “Billies and Charlies.” The appeal of the unknown was more skillfully utilized by Rouchomovski and Van Meegeren. In the tiara of Saitapharnes, existing models had been used, through reproductions, for the reliefs and inscriptions; but as a whole, the tiara was something of a kind unknown, yet eagerly sought for, and so was more readily accepted when it came into the market. Similarly, unknown early works of Vermeer had long been a matter of speculation among art historians, and in certain quarters a hypothetical character for them had been built up; so that when The Disciples at Emmaus appeared and more or less fitted the bill, it was all the more easy to believe in it.

A forgery of Egyptian limestone sculpture (RIGHT) compared with a genuine example of the type (LEFT). The forgery was proved so by analyzing the binding material of the color.

14

So far, the forgeries discussed have been substantially new constructions. This is to be expected when the motives of challenge to the past or self-vindication are at work; usually, however, the forger prefers to use a genuine piece, wholly or in part, as a starting point for his operations. This has none of the disadvantages of a copy; it avoids some of the difficulties of finding suitable materials; and it provides a pattern for such things as color, texture, and surface condition, in any changes or additions that the forger may make.

One possibility is to construct a forgery with the aid of genuine fragments, or on the basis of a damaged original. Joseph Nollekens, the eighteenth-century English sculptor, who worked with Thomas Jenkins in Rome, himself tells of making extensive additions to pieces of Roman sculpture found as the result of excavation, which in due course went into famous collections in England. Similarly, Dossena sometimes used fragments of genuine quattrocento work in his forgeries. This, too, was the method favored by Ioni for making his early Italian paintings. One great convenience of such procedures (for the forger) is that if suspicion is aroused and investigation made, it can always be alleged that the added work is merely honest restoration. Indeed, the line between restoration and forgery sometimes becomes blurred. Occasionally there appears in the art market a graft of a piece of one original onto another; its sellers would be consumed with indignation were it suggested that they had handled a forgery.

The exploitation of genuine work, however, often takes much simpler forms than that described above. The signature of a master may be added to a school piece, or to anything that bears some superficial resemblances to his work; sometimes, indeed, the addition is to a work by the master himself, to convince the doubting and to increase its sale value. Not infrequently, however, there is present an inconvenient signature of the real author, which has to be obliterated or manipulated into something more attractive. A special form of manipulation is to put on some anonymous portrait a name which more or less fits the dress and character of the sitter, and so increases its sale value. Shakespeare and Milton are often so honored; and many mediocre portraits picked up in England have been adorned with the names of Colonial worthies, and thus found a ready market in the United States.

All the examples of forgery so far mentioned are of the manufactured type, however little work may have been expended on them. In this they differ entirely from the forgeries which depend wholly on misrepresentation, a genuine 15 article of one kind being passed off as of another, without any physical change. It is not usual to brand such things as forgeries, and legally they are not so regarded; but morally, in that something is made to appear what it is not, they seem to be truly forgeries.

ABOVE: A forgery (partly cleaned for examination) of a fifteenth-century Florentine portrait, compared with a genuine example (BELOW). The forgery is on an old panel, but was finally proved false by the presence of titanium white, a twentieth-century pigment.

A simple and widespread means of falsifying in this way is a certificate of authorship and genuineness. Sometimes, the writers of these are of the highest competence and probity. These two qualities are not always combined, however; and the certificate then becomes either intentionally or innocently misleading. Unfortunately, most certificates are written for a fee, and there is always temptation for the writer to err on the side of pleasing his employer; while there is no question that sometimes certificates have been given deliberately to defraud. Moreover, forged certificates bearing reputable names are not unknown, a special variety being the stringing together of words from a genuine letter, with all qualifying or negative phrases omitted. There is, however, a 16 more insidious method of giving a certificate, that of publication of an object in a reliable journal. Editors are generally careful enough; but they are defenseless in the face of a plausible case put forward by a name of some reputation, especially when the passage relating to the object is included in a more general context. This kind of certification is particularly difficult to cope with, since such articles will continue to be cited in later publications, perhaps mainly to controvert them but nevertheless renewing their availability for dishonest purposes.

Construction of false pedigrees is another means of misrepresentation, much used in the case of copies or versions. Sometimes, a pedigree is completely false, naming imaginary former owners whose existence cannot be proved but equally cannot be disproved. Sometimes, such history as the object may have is grafted onto that of another and accepted version, so that the two may become confused. A special case of this is the planting out of objects in houses whose owners are ready, for a consideration, to describe them as having descended in the family, or even as having been bought from the maker by an ancestor.

The skill, ingenuity, and knowledge of the forger and of those who exploit his work, are opposed to the skill, ingenuity, and knowledge of the collector and the learned world. The unaided human eye, if it has a trained and well-informed mind behind it, can go a long way in detecting forgeries. It is surprising how forgetful, careless, or ignorant a forger can be. He may employ materials whose inconsistency with the period to which his work claims to belong can be seen even by the unaided eye. More common is the introduction of such things as types and details of costume, or the use of coats of arms, that are later than the alleged date of the work. All such evidence, however, needs scrutiny, since it may simply be a case of later additions to a genuine object. More useful, therefore, may be tracking down the source of a forger’s borrowings. If, for example, these at first sight seem to come from an original work, but follow much more closely the variations from that original in a later copy or engraving, the conclusion is obvious. Again, investigation of pedigrees, checking of literary references, searching through exhibition records, may all reveal suspicious or occasionally damning evidence of falsified history.

17

ABOVE: A forgery of a portrait by Cranach, and (BELOW) a genuine example. A style forgery, skillful, but coarser than an original.

18

To tests based on observation and historical verification, we must add those mainly dependent on feeling. For the sensitive and trained observer, a number of indefinable characteristics will “add up” to a definite conviction of genuine or false. Qualities of surface and handling, subtleties in color and in the definition of form, the degree of unity in conception and treatment, and the emotional character of the work are among the things which influence such decisions. Thus, a copy, however exact, may reveal itself as lacking the coherence and the feeling which inspired the original; and the most skillful imitation of some older work may be recognized as a creation of its own time. Nobody can completely divorce himself from the prevailing thoughts, opinions, assumptions, feelings, and standards of his own period; and inevitably these will color whatever he produces, whether he be a forger or an original artist.

Scorn is often poured on judgments of the type described, and the expert who produces them in a court of law is the delight of the skillful cross-examiner. True, the only merit of snap opinions based on defective sensibility and inadequate experience is that they have a fifty-fifty chance of being right; but with sensibility backed by knowledge, an almost supra-rational instinct develops as to what is genuine or false. The so-called impression or hunch is, in such circumstances, more accurately described as a synthesis of many experiences. It is often forgotten that such almost instinctive judgments are not confined to art and archaeology. They play an important part in the sciences (where they are called hypotheses), in politics, in war, in business, and many other fields. Their value varies with the men who make them; but this does not lessen their potential value, and their occasional indispensability. In the detection of two particular types of forgery they are especially useful. Imitations of contemporary work can be very baffling, since the forger works with materials which were or might have been used in genuine work, does not have to give an appearance of age, and works against the same general background as does the artist he imitates. Similarly, a school piece which is misrepresented as the work of an old master, was produced in a similar physical and emotional environment. In such cases, a final verdict often has to be based on nothing but imponderable elements of style, realizable only through feeling based on knowledge.

19

ABOVE: An imitation of the work of John Constable, distinguished from an original (BELOW) by its coarse handling and mistakes in topography.

20

The methods so far described of detecting forgeries may well be as old as the practice of forgery itself. Certainly, they form the basis of all investigations of which we have records, as well as of those made today. Their efficiency, however, has been immensely increased by the development of scientific methods of investigation. The first great step forward came with the use of photography, which permitted comparison of suspicious objects with genuine examples in a way hitherto impossible. Next came the application of various scientific techniques to the analysis of the physical constitution of an object. So spectacular have been the results in some cases as to create a blind faith in such methods of investigation, almost as though a piece of scientific apparatus were an oracle which when consulted would answer “Yes” or “No” to the question of whether an object is genuine. The limits of scientific investigation are, however, clearly marked. This method is solely concerned with the physical make-up of an object, and is completely indifferent as to who made it, when and where it was made, and why it was made. All that it does is to make possible the discovery of physical facts bearing upon these matters, which have to be observed and interpreted by human minds and used as the basis for human judgments.

ABOVE: A forgery of a painting by Utrillo adapted from a genuine example, compared with another genuine picture (BELOW). Note the clumsy handling of paint and drawing in the forgery.

21

The scientific procedures with which we are concerned here fall into two main groups. Of these, one includes various techniques for extending the range of human vision. The simplest is examination by microscope, which enables characteristics of a surface to be seen that would otherwise be invisible, so that, for example, painted cracks or cracks artificially induced can be distinguished from crackle due to age. With the microscope, too, evidence of removals and additions can be obtained, such as the manipulation of signatures and inscriptions, or the presence of repaint or artificial patina; while the structure of pigments, stone, etc., can be ascertained, as a step toward their identification. More elaborate is examination under various rays of the spectrum, to which the human eye is not sensitive but whose results can be recorded. The best known of these is X-ray, which penetrates certain substances but is held up in different degrees by others, especially metals, so that a photographic film behind an object will record a map of such substances in an object, thus revealing much 22 that is below the surface. On the other hand, ultra-violet rays falling on a surface cause fluorescence, which varies according to substance and texture, so that additions to the surface may be revealed. Infra-red rays, in contrast, penetrate the surface, and are reflected back from the layers beneath, so that a photograph taken by infra-red light may reveal something concealed from the eye, which X-ray may not pick up.

The second group of investigatory methods includes various means of analyzing the materials present in an object. The most familiar is chemical analysis; but this is being supplemented and to some extent displaced by spectrographic analysis, with its recent extension in the use of X-ray diffraction. By these means, it is possible to detect even minute traces of substances whose presence or absence may be decisive in settling the date or provenance of a material. Some recent applications of quantitative analysis have proved helpful in ascertaining the date of objects. One of these techniques, determination of the extent of fluorination, was used to prove that the jawbone of the Piltdown skull was a modern forgery; while another, based on the amount of radio-active carbon present, which is known to decay at a certain rate, is still in course of development, but promises to be most useful.

Thus, a formidable group of weapons are available against the forger. To be effective, however, the significance of the facts they bring to light must be understood. Decisive proof that an object is not of the period or by the hand to which it is attributed comes only through the discovery of facts which are not only inconsistent with the attribution but cannot be explained except by assuming that the attribution is wrong. For instance, the body of a work may contain a substance unknown at its ostensible date. Modern nails inside a piece of wood sculpture said to be of the fourteenth century; cobalt, unknown as a pigment until the early nineteenth century, in a painting attributed to Velázquez; and titanium white, a twentieth-century invention, in a portrait labelled fifteenth-century Florentine—these are all good evidence that the object is not what it is held out to be.

Moreover, the facts discovered always have to be controlled by reference to established standards. Structure revealed by microscopic examination must be compared with that of known substances; chemical and spectrographic analysis has to be checked by reference to a codified series of earlier tests; crackle on a surface can only be labelled as false if the nature of genuine crackle is known; 23 and the reading of whatever is discovered by X-ray, ultra-violet, or infra-red rays calls for comparison with verified results of previous examinations. The facts yielded by one method of investigation may by themselves not be sufficient evidence of forgery; if, however, they can be joined with the results of other methods, all pointing in the same direction, a strong case can be built up. As in a court of law, this, rather than production of a single dramatic and decisive piece of evidence, is what usually happens.

It might be thought that the combination of expert and scientist would leave the forger with his occupation gone. On the contrary, he continues to flourish. In the face of the expert, he discards the clumsy copy and the inept certificate, utilizing the improved methods of photography and reproduction and the increasing flood of learned works, to help save him from anachronisms and inherent contradictions in his work. The scientist he meets either by concentrating in fields where scientific methods of inquiry are relatively helpless, or by himself going to school with the scientist. The results of recent scientific work have put at his disposal much knowledge of what to do, what to avoid, and how to baffle certain types of investigation. Moreover, he has even taken over certain procedures worked out by scientists, such as those for hastening the effect of time, and has applied them to his own problems; cases are known of forgeries having been submitted, through innocent hands, for scientific investigation, to find out whether they will survive the ordeal, and if not, what are the mistakes to be avoided in the future.

* * * * * * * *

One question is often asked in connection with forgeries: Why should a once-admired object be disregarded or condemned on being proved a forgery, seeing that it is still the same object? One reason is human snobbery; another, and more important, is that when an object is proved to be a forgery, it is to us no longer the same object that it was. After the discovery, human knowledge about the positive and negative qualities of the object has increased, and a new judgment has to be made upon it. Exactly the same thing happens with a genuine work. As familiarity with it grows, it becomes another thing to the spectator’s eyes and mind, and so it may rise or fall in his esteem. Conceivably, the characteristics which proclaim something to be a forgery might, when discovered, cause it to be more highly regarded; but that kind of forgery is not yet known, though it may perhaps exist.

W. G. CONSTABLE

William George Constable was born in Derby, England, in 1887 and educated at Cambridge University and the Slade School of the University of London. He was formerly Assistant Director of the National Gallery, London; Director of the Courtauld Institute (University of London); and Slade Professor of Fine Art at Cambridge University. Since 1938, he has been Curator of Paintings at the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston.

The author of numerous books and magazine articles, Mr. Constable has devoted himself particularly to the study of English and Italian paintings and drawings. This is reflected in his more recent publications: Venetian Painting (1950); a monograph on the English artist Richard Wilson (1953); and The Painter’s Workshop (1954).

BACK COVER: A forgery of a Greek bronze statuette.

## Transcriber’s Notes

- Silently corrected a few typos.
- Retained publication information from the printed edition: this eBook is public-domain in the country of publication.
- In the text versions only, text in italics is delimited by _underscores_.

*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK FORGERS AND FORGERIES ***
Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will be renamed.
Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG™ concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given away--you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark license, especially commercial redistribution.
START: FULL LICENSE
THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work (or any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or online at www.gutenberg.org/license.
Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™ electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property (trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in your possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg™ electronic works even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project Gutenberg™ electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.
1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the United States and you are located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg™ works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg™ name associated with the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when you share it without charge with others.
1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project Gutenberg™ work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any country other than the United States.
1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must appear prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg™ work (any work on which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or with which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, copied or distributed:

> This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this eBook.

1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase “Project Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg™ trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is posted with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™ License for all works posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.
1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg™ License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg™.
1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project Gutenberg™ License.
1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work in a format other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in the official version posted on the official Project Gutenberg™ website (www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works provided that:
• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the method you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, but he has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.”
• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™ License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™ works.
• You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of receipt of the work.
• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.
1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.
1.F.
1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by your equipment.
1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the “Right of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party distributing a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.
1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further opportunities to fix the problem.
1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone providing copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any Defect you cause.
Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg™
Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from people in all walks of life.
Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™’s goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure and permanent future for Project Gutenberg™ and future generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org.
Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit 501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws.
The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact
Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission of increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations ($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt status with the IRS.
The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate.
While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who approach us with offers to donate.
International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate
Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.
Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several printed editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.
Most people start at our website which has the main PG search facility: www.gutenberg.org.
This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™, including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.