Autorzy przedstawiają zarys głównych problemów dotyczących nierzetelności naukowej, podając ich defi nicje. Opisują kilka przypadków jaskrawych naruszeń prawa autorskiego w polskich pracach naukowych. W konkluzji widzą konieczność energicznego działania prewencyjnego przez środowisko akademickie.

The assemblage of coins found in the Old Town district of Lublin (6a, Wincentego Pola St., presently known as Archidiakońska St.) on 1 July 1981 consists of 21 false groschen of Sigismund III Vasa (1587–1632) and 2 fragments of unspecified coins. As a result of the research analysis, it has been found that the coins were minted in tin-coated copper. Despite the fact that the dates are decipherable only on 10 groschen coins, it may be inferred from the identity of the coin dies that 15 of them (71.4%) bear the year 1608, while 5 (23.8%) – 1607. No date has been determined for only one coin. The groschen of 1607, struck with the use of one pair of coin dies, imitate the bust / eagle type. This particular variation tends to prevail also among the pieces with the date 1608 (13 out of a total number of 15 pieces), which had been coined with the use of two pairs of dies. 1 groschen with a bust and 2 groschen with a crown image had been struck by means of some other coin dies. The fact that the forged coins were found at the site of the former townhouse owned by the mayor Jan Szembek (since 1608) allows us to presume that they may have been deposited there as a result of some administrative action taken against the illegal practice. Beginning from the early decades of the 17th century, conditions for the growth of such practices had been created and fuelled by the atmosphere of the increasing economic crisis and the resulting perturbations spreading across the monetary markets of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.

ABSTRACT:

Forgeries of coins can either be contemporary or modern. Already in the Middle Ages, it was well known that bracteates were considerably more difficult to counterfeit than two-faced coins. The main reason is that bracteates are struck with a more complicated technology originating from goldsmithing. Therefore, most bracteate forgeries have been produced since the eighteenth century. Compared to original bracteates, modern bracteate forgeries often have the following characteristics: 1) an incorrect weight; 2) a lower relief; 3) sharper contours on the reverse; 4) an artistically clumsy design; 5) evidence of being struck with the same die if there are several specimens; and/or 6) empty fields in the background.

In the collection of the National Museum in Warsaw there are four small sets, originating from the eastern lands of the former Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. They had belonged to the collection of Józef Choynowski and, as a deposit of the Society for the Encouragement of Fine Arts, in 1923 became a part of the Museum’s collection. They represent quite a wide time horizon, dated from the beginning of the 16th century to the half of the 17th century. Their compositions are similar to deposits from the same period, and size allow to determine them as content of purses. The older hoards are homogeneous in nature, while the later ones are more varied, including, among others, many counterfeit coins. The circumstances of their deposition are unknown.

The article presents the interpretation of a coin found in the Kuyavian region, Central Poland a few years ago. According to the most plausible hypothesis, it is a cast barbarian copy of a barbarian imitation of a Roman denarius. In other words, the barbarians most likely made (by casting) a copy of an imitation previously made (presumably struck) by other barbarians using a Roman original as a model. Numerous barbarian copies and barbarian imitations of Roman denarii have been recorded in recent years. However, the author of the presented article is not aware of any cast copies of imitations, therefore, taking into account the current state of research, the artefact described in the article should be considered unique.