FAKING ‘OLD MASTERS’

Dominion, Volume 26, Issue 220, 13 June 1933, Page 3

FAKING ‘OLD MASTERS’

Scientific Methods of Detection PROFITABLE BUSINESS Doubts thrown on the authenticity of the Rembrandt and Tiepolo paintings, purchased by the trustees of the Felton Bequest for the Melbourne Gallery, recall stories of fake Old Masters which have been successfully passed off on the credulous. Paris is a centre for Old Master fakes, and the business has been extremely profitable, the chief purchasers being wealthy Aanericans, who have not been wise enough to entrust their picture-buying to an expert Of repute. Two methods are employed by the fakers—one is to paint a composite of figures and draperies copied from a large number of the old Master’s known paintings. The other is to copy some famous paintings exactly, and assure the buyer that the Master painted several copies of It in his lifetime; or even to cast a doubt on the original in some well-known gallery—if the purchaser is simple enough to believe this. A case In point was the Leonardo da Vinci sold to a Kansas millionairess, Mrs. Andree Hahn. It purported to be the "La Belle Ferroniere” of the famous painter. The real picture is in the Louvre, Paris. Sir Joseph Duveen, the celebrated connoisseur, was invited to Inspect it, and pronounced it a fake —*'a copy, and a poor one at that.” So wild was the moneyed lady at this verdict that she brought an action against Sir Joseph Duveen, and her lawyers had the temerity to insinuate that the Louvre picture was only a copy of the one she had bought! The weight of evidence, both of art and technical experts, went against Mrs. Hahn, and the case lapsed, the jury (sadly bewildered) failing to agree. Professor Laurie of Edinburgh (Scotland), famous expert analyst of pigments, supplied the most telling evidence in favour of the Louvre painting (to connoisseurs, of course, Mrs. Hahn’s contentions were absurd). Professor Laurie found that the paints and medium of the Louvre picture corresponded exactly to those of da Vinci as cited in the latter’s notebooks, and were of his epoch, whereas the copy was modern. Tell-tale Paint. Professor Laurie originated the method of extracting tiny spots of paint from famous pictures by a hypodermic needle-point, and examining these under the microscope, also submitting them to chemical analysis. A few years ago what purported to be a genuine Jacob Van Ruysdael was offered to a wealthy New York collector. Critics inclined to believe it a genuine work of the famous seven-teenth-century Dutch landscape painter. But an analysis of the paint and basis showed it was an imitation about 75 years old. The oak panel basis, when tiny sliver was examined microscopically, showed that the protoplasm of the cells had not quite dried out, corresponding to an age of 75 years. "The clouds in the sky were of zinc white (not white lead, used by Flemish painters 300 years ago), and finally the bitumen In the shadows was still transparent and soluble, Instead of black and insoluble, as 300 years would make it. Another queer case was that of Leonardo’s famous Mona Lisa, audaciously Stolen from the Louvre in 1911, and not recovered till two years afterward. A rumour spread that the picture recovered was only a clever copy. Professor Cellericr then made an X-ray examination of it, which revealed the blurred outlines of other Moua Lisas below, showing (as history confirms) that Leonardo had made many changes before his work satisfied him. Obviously an expert copyist, with the original before him, would not have made these changes.

X-rays, which show up any picture on a canvas over which a later picture has been painted, have been invaluable in judging old paintings. Often a fake Old Master has been painted over an old painting of no merit, so as to get a gen‘uinely ancient wood basis. A strange discovery was made when a disputed portrait of Queen Elizabeth, by Pourbus (a sixteenth century Fleming) was rayed. Critics had objected to the insipidity and "pussiness” of the technique as uulike Pourbns. nor did the portrait resemble Elizabeth. The X-ray showed a typical Pourbus beneath the surface picture, with Queen Bess depleted in unflattering manner. The original had evidently been “dolled up” for fear of displeasing the Queen.

Under the Ray. X-rays are now employed by the leading art galleries of the world and have led to some strange discoveries. Last year the Louvre built a laboratory for the examination of all its art treasures by the methods of microphotography, chemical analysis, and X or ultra-violet rays. What can be done by mierophotograpby was shown in England when doubts were cast on the genuineness of Rembrandt’s “Good Samaritan” in the Wallace collection. An artist’s brush stroke under the microscope is as expressive of his Identity as peustrokes, viewed similarly, are of any individual’s handwriting. Photomicrographs of the brush strokes in the "Good Samaritan” were so Rembrandtesque that many of them, printed ou glass, fitted exactly over brush strokes, luicrophotographed similarly, from Rembrandt’s “Woman Taken in Adultery” from the National Gallery. The Louvre authorities have X-rayed the whole 9000 odd masterpieces in their possession. There were many queer discoveries. A specimen attributed to Carlo Dole!, a seventeenth century painter, was found to be three-quarters the work of someone else. Two centuries before, a canvas of Dolci’s had mysteriously disappeared. The X-ray showed that someone had painted another picture over it, leaving only a few figures and the original signature. The idea obviously was to sell it as a hitherto unknown Dole!, and so avoid its being traced to the thief. The outer layer picture has since been removed, showing the true original. With these new scientific aids for the big collectors and art galleries, the work of the faker of Old Masters becomes difficult. How profitable in the past faking in its cleverest form has been is vouched for by the astounding fact—Rembrandt in his lifetime painted about 700 pictures; but there are now 3000 "genuine Rembrandts” extant.