Actors Behind the Defamation Campaign

This section examines the principal individuals, networks, and institutions that contributed to the campaign known as ReceptioGate.

The aim is not to repeat the chronology already documented elsewhere on this website, but to identify the actors involved, their roles, their relationships, and the interests that connected them.

1. The Società Internazionale di Storia della Miniatura (SISM)

The Società Internazionale di Storia della Miniatura became one of the principal environments through which the campaign developed.

Several individuals who later participated in attacks against Prof. Carla Rossi were members of the Society or closely connected to its activities.

The Society's mailing lists were used to circulate messages targeting Rossi and her institutions. Some communications were anonymous. Others were presented in ways that created confusion regarding their origin and institutional status.

The most serious aspect of the affair lies in the fact that the Society never carried out a transparent public clarification of the events, despite repeated requests and despite the documented circulation of defamatory material through channels connected to its membership network.

The result was the transformation of a scholarly environment into a vehicle for personal and professional attacks.

2. Gaudenz Freuler

Gaudenz Freuler occupies a distinctive position within the affair.

Unlike many participants who simply repeated allegations, Freuler had direct knowledge of the manuscript world at the centre of the controversy.

For years he acted as an expert for collectors, dealers, and auction houses involved in the circulation of detached manuscript leaves.

His authority derived not from online activity but from his reputation as a specialist in medieval illumination.

This makes his role particularly significant.

Rather than remaining distant from the controversy, Freuler became actively involved immediately after information concerning Prof. Rossi's heritage-protection activities entered public circulation.

He repeatedly sought access to documentation, intervened behind the scenes, and became part of the network from which the earliest attacks emerged.

The contrast is striking.

A scholar documenting the destruction and dispersal of manuscripts became the target of a campaign in which one of the most active figures was a specialist who had long operated within the very market under scrutiny.

3. Peter Kidd

Peter Kidd represents the public face of ReceptioGate.

For years he cultivated an online reputation as a specialist in manuscript provenance through his blog and collaborations with auction houses, dealers, and collectors.

His blog presented itself as an instrument of transparency.

In practice, however, it became the principal platform through which accusations against Prof. Rossi were amplified and disseminated internationally.

Unlike a peer-reviewed publication, the blog operated without editorial oversight, independent review, or institutional accountability.

This allowed allegations, insinuations, and speculative interpretations to circulate freely while acquiring an appearance of authority.

The paradox of the affair is evident.

A figure who had spent years describing and promoting detached manuscript leaves became one of the most aggressive critics of a scholar whose research focused on reconstructing the manuscripts from which such leaves had been removed.

The conflict was therefore not merely personal.

It reflected fundamentally different attitudes toward cultural heritage, provenance research, and the ethics of manuscript dispersal.

4. The University of Zurich

The University of Zurich occupies a special place in the affair because of its relationship with both Prof. Rossi and Gaudenz Freuler.

For many years, Rossi taught and conducted research within the University's academic framework.

At the same time, Freuler remained a respected figure within the Zurich scholarly environment.

When the campaign escalated, the University failed to address the obvious conflicts of interest surrounding some of the individuals involved.

Instead of investigating the broader context in which the allegations emerged, institutional attention focused primarily on the accusations themselves.

This imbalance had profound consequences.

The researcher who had become the target of a coordinated campaign found herself subjected to scrutiny, while the actors whose interests intersected with the manuscript market remained largely outside institutional examination.

The result was a failure of academic governance whose consequences continue to resonate today.

Why These Actors Matter

ReceptioGate was never simply the story of a blog.

It was the convergence of personal networks, institutional inertia, commercial interests, and academic rivalries.

Each actor played a different role.

Some supplied legitimacy.

Some supplied platforms.

Some supplied expertise.

Some supplied accusations.

Together, they created an environment in which a campaign that should never have moved beyond a handful of online posts acquired international visibility and institutional consequences.

Understanding those actors is essential to understanding how ReceptioGate became possible.

📸 Archival screenshot and commentary: www.receptio.eu/diffamazione

https://www.oprom.eu/who-is-peter-kidd

https://www.isfida.eu/who-is-peter-kidd

4. Other individuals involved in the defamatory campaign

The ReceptioGate affair exposed the coordinated participation of individuals from both academic and media circles. These include:

• Peter Burger (journalist), who publicly repeated unverified claims;
  
  

• Sanne Wellen, involved in earlier online disparagement;
  
  

• Marina Bernasconi, associated with actions aimed at discrediting RECEPTIO;
  
  

• Lisa Fagin Davis (Fragmentarium), who publicly questioned the integrity of the centre’s reconstruction work;
  
  

• The anonymous Twitter account @WhiteKnightti was actively used to circulate defamatory and harassing content targeting Prof. Rossi throughout 2023. The account was abruptly deleted shortly after legal proceedings were initiated before the Civil Court of Rome. Despite its apparent anonymity, technical analysis allowed the identification of the IP address linked to the individual operating the account. The digital traces and deleted posts have been preserved and are part of the evidentiary material submitted to the competent authorities.
  
  

• Several contributors to Fragmentarium and affiliated media outlets who echoed false narratives without verification.
  
  

Each of these names is documented through public statements, tweets, email evidence or published material, all archived or recorded prior to deletion.

5. Threats, Forgeries, and Digital Harassment

The campaign extended well beyond academic disagreement. Between late 2022 and mid-2023, Prof. Rossi and several colleagues received death threats, anonymous hate mail, and digital harassment. False obituaries in her name were published on Swiss platforms. These actions were reported to legal authorities and remain part of the official record.

🕯️ Documented examples and legal filings are available via the links above.

Related Academic and Institutional Sources

• ISFiDa – Academic blog with official posts
  https://www.isfida.eu/blog
  
  

• OProM – Institutional communications
  https://www.oprom.eu/news
  
  

• Alta Formazione – Articles on manuscript protection
  https://www.alta-formazione.it/blog
  
  

• Substack – Documentation archive
  https://oprom.substack.com
  
  

• Zenodo – ACMD: Archive of Dismembered Manuscripts
  https://zenodo.org/record/10714613
  
  

• Cambridge Scholars – Biblioclasm and Reconstruction Series
  https://www.cambridgescholars.com/product/978-1-5275-9355-9