This section offers clear and factual answers to recurring questions about the so-called ReceptioGate affair. All information is supported by verifiable documentation, academic publications, and institutional records.
ReceptioGate is not a legitimate academic controversy, but a coordinated smear campaign triggered by the exposure of a cultural and ethical scandal: the dismemberment (biblioclasm) of medieval manuscripts for profit.
The term ReceptioGate was coined by individuals and actors with direct or indirect ties to the antiquarian market, shortly after Prof. Carla Rossi published a documented appeal denouncing the sale of illuminated manuscript leaves and submitted a formal report to the Italian Carabinieriâs Art Crimes Unit in December 2022.
Far from being about plagiarism or institutional legitimacyâas falsely claimed by anonymous blogs and defamatory emailsâthe affair centres on the scholarly reconstruction of dismembered codices, and the economic and reputational threat this work poses to those who profit from manuscript dispersion.
The campaign targeted Prof. Rossi personally, as well as the RECEPTIO research centre, its collaborators, and institutional partners. It included:
the publication of defamatory blog posts and social media threads;
coordinated emails sent from falsified academic addresses;
anonymous threats and false obituaries;
and the strategic misuse of mailing lists from academic societies.
What the affair truly reveals is how fragile the academic ecosystem becomes when cultural ethics confront financial interests. The attempt to discredit Rossiâs work was not about factsâit was about silencing dissent, protecting a market, and preserving a status quo in which the destruction of cultural heritage is normalised and monetised.
ReceptioGate is, in essence, the backlash against scholarly resistance to biblioclasm.
Yes. In response to defamatory allegations circulated onlineâranging from claims of plagiarism to doubts about academic credentialsâProf. Rossi submitted a detailed perizia pro veritate (expert legal opinion) to the Federal Administrative Court in St. Gallen, Switzerland.
This document, prepared by a qualified legal expert and based on primary textual and legal analysis, concluded that the accusations lacked merit, were based on unfounded or manipulated material, and did not meet the standards required for any formal disciplinary or judicial proceeding.
The ReceptioGate affair and the content of this legal defence are fully documented in the monograph by Jordi Puig:
Prof. Carla Rossi is an internationally recognised philologist and codicologist with over thirty years of academic activity. She is the author of dozens of peer-reviewed publications, founder of the RECEPTIO research centre, and editor of several volumes on manuscript studies, including critical editions of medieval texts and digital reconstructions of dismembered Books of Hours.
Official biography and dossier: www.carlarossi.info
Author page â Viella: https://www.viella.it/catalogo/autore/1112
SIFR (SocietĂ Italiana di Filologia Romanza): https://sifr.it/sifr_new/carla-rossi-marie-de-france-et-les-erudits-de-cantorbery/
UniversitĂ di Milano â Riviste: https://riviste.unimi.it/index.php/carteromanze/article/download/4249/4361/0
The Research Centre for European Philological Tradition (RECEPTIO) is an independent scholarly institution originally established in Switzerland as a private foundation and later restructured as a cultural association. Its mission is to conduct advanced research in codicology, textual philology, and the material history of medieval and early modern manuscripts.
RECEPTIO is internationally recognised for its pioneering work in the digital reconstruction of dismembered codices, particularly Books of Hours, Psalters, and liturgical manuscripts that have been dispersed through the antiquarian market. The centreâs approach combines historical investigation, palaeographical analysis, and digital methodologies to reunite, study, and republish codices that have been intentionally dismantled for profit.
Its projects have been presented at international conferences, published in peer-reviewed volumes, and adopted by scholars, universities, and preservation institutions committed to manuscript integrity and cultural heritage protection.
Official website: https://www.receptio.eu
In December 2022, Prof. Rossi published a documented article denouncing the sale of illuminated manuscript leaves online and filed a report with the Italian Carabinieriâs Art Crimes Unit. This triggered a backlash from actors affiliated with the antiquarian market, who then began a smear campaign to discredit her and her work.
Original article on AboutArtOnline: https://www.aboutartonline.com/manoscritti-medievali-europei-a-prezzi-stracciati-sul-web-un-appello-per-la-tutela-di-beni-culturali-tra-i-piu-preziosi/
Among other activities, RECEPTIO specialises in the digital and scholarly reconstruction of medieval manuscripts that have been dismantled and sold as individual leaves. The work combines historical research, cataloguing, paleography, and manuscript archaeology.
Peter Kidd is a British manuscript dealer who promotes himself as a scholarly blogger while actively collaborating with auction houses and private collectors involved in the trade of dismembered codices. He has no academic title, position, or institutional affiliation, yet frequently presents his opinions as authoritative while operating entirely outside the standards of peer review and academic accountability.
Since December 2022âimmediately after Prof. Carla Rossi publicly denounced the sale of illuminated leaves and filed a report with the Italian CarabinieriâKidd has launched a sustained campaign of defamation against her. Through over twenty posts on his personal blog, he has targeted not only Rossi but also the RECEPTIO research centre, her collaborators, and even her legal counsel.
Kiddâs involvement in the cataloguing, description, and commercial promotion of excised manuscript leavesâmany of which have been reconstructed and studied in Rossiâs publicationsâplaces him in a glaring conflict of interest. His attacks are not scholarly critiques: they are retaliatory and strategic, aimed at discrediting those who oppose the market from which he benefits.
What he presents as âprovenance researchâ is, in fact, a selective narrative designed to legitimise biblioclasm. His blog has become a vehicle not for transparency, but for the defence of a trade that profits from the irreversible destruction of cultural heritage.
A detailed and verified chronology of the events, actors, and publications involved in the campaign is available through the Organisation pour la Protection des Manuscrits Médiévaux (OProM):
OProM Substack â Timeline: https://oprom.substack.com/p/documented-timeline-of-the-defamation
OProM official site: https://www.oprom.eu
ISFiDa blog: https://www.isfida.eu/blog
ISFiDa â Academic blog with official posts
https://www.isfida.eu/blog
OProM â Institutional communications
https://www.oprom.eu/news
Alta Formazione â Articles on manuscript protection
https://www.alta-formazione.it/blog
Substack â Documentation archive
https://oprom.substack.com
Zenodo â ACMD: Archive of Dismembered Manuscripts
https://zenodo.org/record/10714613
Cambridge Scholars â Biblioclasm and Reconstruction Series
https://www.cambridgescholars.com/product/978-1-5275-9355-9