One of the challenges associated with authenticating art is that it can sometimes be difficult to procure an expert’s opinion. During the past decade, various artists’ foundations have either dismantled or decided not to provide opinions on authenticity. In addition, some experts refrain from providing advice due to fear of litigation. With the exorbitant expense of defending oneself in court, possible damage to a professional reputation, and the stress involved in litigious battles, some experts abstain from involvement in authentication disputes.

However, in the case of van Gogh works, there is a source that willingly provides expertise—the Van Gogh Museum. This week’s publication of a sketchbook purportedly belonging to van Gogh is creating waves in the art world because the author of the text did not confer with the leading van Gogh authority. Rather than present the works to the recognized experts on the oeuvre of the artist, the author of “Vincent van Gogh: The Lost Arles Sketchbook” excluded the museum’s opinion in the book. However, the museum had repeatedly informed the owners of the sketches that they are not by the Dutch artist. The sketchbook’s anonymous owners approached the museum in 2008 and 2012 and were told that the drawings were forgeries.

The museum has definitively said that the works are fakes for three reasons: forensic anomalies, unclear provenance, and stylistic irregularities. The forensics are wrong—the materials used for the sketches are not the type used by van Gogh. The sketches feature brown pigment, where as Van Gogh used black or purple ink. What’s more, the paper used is different than the type used by the famed artist. The provenance in unreliable, as a source purporting to establish its presence in the 1890s is questionable. And even more damning is the style. The museum asserts that the sketches do not reflect the artist’s style or artistic development during the time they were supposedly drawn. They also feature “typical mistakes.” The museum states that “the person who made them is following the examples of van Gogh in a superficial way and doesn’t know what van Gogh was aiming for.”

However, the academics supporting the van Gogh attribution discuss the sketchbook’s interesting history, and the author of the academic work spent three years examining the work’s history, purportedly tracing it back to a French cafe in 1890.

The recent announcement of the sketchbook draws attention to the art world’s sometimes contentious authentication process, and the inevitable battle of experts that frequently results. However, in a market full of skillfully executed forgeries, it is surprising that any art scholar would not heavily weigh the knowledge of the leading authorities (at the Van Gogh Museum) who were ready and willing to provide valuable expertise. To read more about the authentication process and the history of forgeries, find a copy of my recent academic publication: Are you Faux Real? An Examination of Art Forgery and the Legal Tools Protecting Art Collectors.