<p>In their investigation on the epistemic role of scientific models, many philosophers of science have historically focused on scientific representation. In this received view, a model serves as a system that represents a target system – a portion of phenomena of interest. However, this representational view has been criticised, particularly by proponents of so-called artefactualism. This view contrasts models’ artefactual nature with the representational perspective. This paper has two aims. First, it clarifies the points of disagreement between artefactualism and the representational view I support, which bases representation on interpretation, denotation, exemplification and de-idealisation functions – rather than similarity or isomorphism. Second, it offers a synergistic solution that incorporates several insights of artefactualism within a more sophisticated representational account.</p>