Repeatable Artworks as Created Types

I sketch here an intuitive picture of repeatable artworks as created types, which are individuated in part by historical paths of (re) production. Although attractive, this view has been rejected by a number of authors on the basis of general claims about abstract objects. On consideration, however, these general claims are overgeneralizations, which, while true of some abstracta, are not true of all abstract objects, and in particular, are not true of created types. The intuitive picture of repeatable artworks as created types is then left in place.