Peter Kidd, Medieval Manuscripts Provenance: Excised Leaves, and the Illusion of Provenance Research – 2025 Commentary

Peter Kidd’s blog Medieval Manuscripts Provenance was for years perceived as a niche tool for tracing manuscript ownership. However, a closer examination of its structure, purpose, and use by dealers reveals that the blog often functioned as an amplifier for the commercial circulation of excised leaves — folios removed from illuminated manuscripts and sold individually on the antiquarian market.

The blog, which has not been updated since early 2023, lacked any formal peer-review structure, legal disclaimer, or public interest statement. Unlike cultural heritage blogs that operate within a clear legal framework (such as Cristina Cumbo’s LaTPC, which adheres to Italian copyright law and Creative Commons licensing), Kidd’s platform never declared a non-commercial purpose.

In 2022, research conducted by Professor Carla Rossi brought renewed attention to several cases involving dismembered manuscripts and detached illuminated leaves circulating on the international market. Among them were the three leaves removed in 1979 from Turin manuscript E.V.5, preserved in the Biblioteca Nazionale Universitaria di Torino.

Two of these leaves resurfaced decades later on the antiquarian market and were offered for sale at Sotheby's in London on 7 July 2015. The catalogue descriptions were prepared by Peter Kidd.

In August and October 2022, documentation concerning manuscript dismemberment and the circulation of detached leaves was submitted to the Italian Carabinieri Tutela Patrimonio Culturale (TPC). Shortly afterwards, public attention moved away from the manuscripts themselves and became concentrated on allegations directed against the researcher who had reported these cases.

On Christmas Eve 2022, Peter Kidd published a large series of blog posts accusing Professor Rossi of plagiarism. The discussion rapidly shifted from questions concerning cultural heritage, provenance, manuscript dismemberment, and stolen leaves to a controversy centred on academic misconduct allegations.

For more than three years, the resulting narrative dominated online discussions surrounding #ReceptioGate.

A crucial development occurred on 7 January 2026, when the Swiss Federal Administrative Court reviewed the case. The judgment annulled the sanctions that had been imposed on Professor Rossi and rejected the plagiarism narrative that had formed the basis of many public accusations.

The central historical questions therefore remain:

• How did leaves removed from Turin MS E.V.5 in 1979 reach the international art market?

• Why were these leaves offered for sale decades after their disappearance?

• What role was played by catalogue descriptions, expert opinions, and provenance narratives in facilitating their circulation?

• Why did discussion of these issues become overshadowed by a campaign focused on the researcher who had reported them?

These questions concern the protection of cultural heritage, the dismantling of manuscripts for profit, and the mechanisms through which public attention can be redirected away from the original facts.

For a detailed reconstruction, see:

Jordi Puig, ReceptioGate. Academic Defamation and the Dismemberment of Manuscripts. Expanded Edition (2026).

#ReceptioGate #PeterKidd #TurinMSEV5 #ManuscriptDismemberment #CulturalHeritage #ArtCrime #Biblioclasm #ProvenanceResearch

Several antiquarian dealers cited Kidd’s blog to legitimise auctions of single leaves with ambiguous provenance. In some cases, Kidd contributed auction catalogue entries himself. His involvement in the commercial promotion of items from dismantled manuscripts — most notably in the case of the Courtanvaux Hours, now reconstructed as the Book of Hours of Louis de Roucy — has been documented in academic publications.

More critically, Kidd attempted to discredit those who publicly denounced these practices. Among his targets was Prof. Carla Rossi, whose reconstruction work exposed the financial mechanisms behind the dismemberment of devotional manuscripts. The defamation campaign that followed is now thoroughly documented.

🔗 To consult the official analysis:👉 Peter Kidd Manuscripts Provenance 2025 – A Documented Analysis

🔗 For additional documentation:• OProM – Kidd and the Mazzarelli Case• Timeline of the ReceptioGate Affair• Peter Kidd – Role in the Defamation Campaign• Official Communications Archive• Medium – What is #ReceptioGate, really?• Zenodo DOI Version• Isabelle Boursier’s Book of Hours (2024)