Fakery

The studies conducted over the last few decades by authors such as Speyer, Grafton (his Forgers and Critics published in 1990 in particular), and more recently, Ruthven,  have created an extremely favourable academic setting for the study of textual and literary — as opposed to traditional — forgery. The new era of postmodernism has also encouraged a difference of feeling towards the work of the forger. Until relatively recently, this “creative activity” was condemned, criticised and even criminalised when the deceit was uncovered. However, many of these ignored and discarded works have captured the curiosity of academics interested in recovering their hidden values for some time now. It is not only their literary value that intrigues researchers; these texts can also provide information on the particular political, social and cultural circumstances that led to their creation. Forged texts can, and in many cases should, become fully-fledged members of a literary tradition and be studied with sensitivity in keeping with modern times and the new approaches of philology and literary criticism.

From both substantive and formal arguments, this paper challenges the authenticity of several lines from the first book of Horace’s Satires (2.114-19; 5.82-85; 6.38-44, 107-9; 10.16-19, 21b-23a, 36-39, 61b-64a). It is argued that they were surreptitiously added by Augustus after the poet’s death in order both to blur his political choices and ridicule him.

ABSTRACT This article examines the phenomenon of fakery and the rise of impostors claiming to have been former secret agents of the special operations executive (SOE). Since the early 1950s, a growing interest in tales of SOE’s exploits, combined with an inconsistent Whitehall position regarding disclosure about the organisation’s activities, has enabled hoaxers to establish their bogus stories and inadvertently bolster popular romantic notions about SOE’s work. Just as genuine agents had to learn to pass as civilians in Nazi-occupied countries, fake agents have produced convincing and often sophisticated narratives that have fooled the public, infiltrating books, television and more recently social media. Several cases of imposture are highlighted, along with examples of memoirs and testimonies of verifiable SOE agents whose accounts nevertheless raise questions about their accuracy and the blurred lines between truth and fabrication. Despite the publication of SOE official histories and the release of thousands of SOE’s files to the National Archives, fakers continue to flourish. This article calls for a greater recognition both of fakery and of the SOE agents and staff whose bona fide careers continue to remain overshadowed by their counterfeit counterparts.

This article examines the phenomenon of fakery and the rise of impostors claiming to have been former secret agents of the special operations executive (SOE). Since the early 1950s, a growing interest in tales of SOE’s exploits, combined with an inconsistent Whitehall position regarding disclosure about the organisation’s activities, has enabled hoaxers to establish their bogus stories and inadvertently bolster popular romantic notions about SOE’s work. Just as genuine agents had to learn to pass as civilians in Nazi-occupied countries, fake agents have produced convincing and often sophisticated narratives that have fooled the public, infiltrating books, television and more recently social media. Several cases of imposture are highlighted, along with examples of memoirs and testimonies of verifiable SOE agents whose accounts nevertheless raise questions about their accuracy and the blurred lines between truth and fabrication. Despite the publication of SOE official histories and the release of thousands of SOE’s files to the National Archives, fakers continue to flourish. This article calls for a greater recognition both of fakery and of the SOE agents and staff whose bona fide careers continue to remain overshadowed by their counterfeit counterparts.