Justia

Labels

About Me

My Photo
Ugly Buddhist Woman
The Dalai Lama said, "Well, yes, a woman Could be the next Dalai Lama, but she'd have to be good looking." ugly.buddhist.woman@gmail.com
View my complete profile

Google Analytics

Powered by Blogger.
Wednesday, July 6, 2011

The "Found" da Vinci was not lost































Provenance:
Once owned by Marquis de Ganay "Salvator Mundi" was auctioned by Sotheby's May 1999 in its "Important Old Masters Paintings" auction.  It sold for $332,500.
According to The City Review:

The highlight of the early works was Lot 20, "Christ as Salvator Mundi," by Circle of Leonardi da Vinci (1452-1519), a 27 by 19 1/4 inch oil on panel that was in less than pristine condition and which is not in the widely recognized style of the great master. "The most compelling document for a Leonardo painting of this subject...is the existence of a print by Wenceslaus Hollar, the great Bohemian engraver, which is clearly captioned "Leonardus da Vinci pinxit...," the catalogue wrote. There are about 12 paintings that are related to the print, "of various levels of quality," it continued, adding that the present work, "cloistered away in the Béhague/de Ganay collection and thus unknown to most scholars until the early 1970's, is perhaps the most accomplished of the varous examples." The lot was estimated at 80,000 to $120,000 and sold for $332,500. If it were an autograph work, of course, it would be worth an extra two digits.  "Important Old Master Paintings; Sotheby's; May 1999"
de Ganay believed the painting to be an original da Vinci.  He had in his collection, at one time, three authentic da Vinci studies of drapery, two of which sold in 1989 for $10.8 million.

(see also: SNOW-SMITH, Joanne, The "Salvator Mundi" of Leonardo da Vinci, exhibition catalogue. Henry Art Gallery (Seattle: University of Washington, 1982). Guerrini 5489
Building upon the pioneering essay by Ludwig Heydenreich ("Leonardo's Salvator Mundi," Raccolta Vinciana 20 [1964], pp. 83-109), the author provides a detailed study of the version in the collection of the Marquis de Ganay, which she attributes to Leonardo. The catalogue includes a discussion of the many other versions of this composition and the iconographic tradition to which it belongs.)


Who purchased the painting for $325,500 in 1999 and how many owners has it had since then?

The crucial question is: When was it restored?
Before the 1999 auction it can be seen in its present state: here and here.

This is the picture the media have been circulating as the recently discovered da Vinci.  But this painting was never lost, and is not the "Simon" da Vinci.

The "Simon" da Vinci in a 1912 photo.

Note the strange cropping left and right.  Da Vinci would Not have chopped off the thumb and part of the globe on the right, nor the knuckles and sleeve on the left.  So we are not getting the complete picture here.

"In 1958, the piece was sold for £45 at an auction in Sotheby's of London by trustees of the Cook collection, who mistakenly attributed it to Boltraffio, an Italian Renaissance painter considered da Vinci's best student."

(Who fucked it up with overpainting?  Read on, I blame the nuns!)
Here is where the history of the two paintings becomes confused:

"The Salvator Mundi (saviour of the World) was commissioned by Louis XII of France in 1506 and Leonardo had finished the work by 1513. The image of Christ giving his blessing to the world was a popular subject in French and Flemish art and the half- length pose is typical of the era.    On the death of his wife  the painting was donated, by Louis, to a religious order who had connections with his wife, in Nantes. A century later  Henrietta Maria, Queen of England, saw the painting in 1650 (the year after her husband Charles Ist was executed) she asked the artist Wenceslaus Hollar to make an etching of the work to add to her collection.

"In the 19th century the convent that possessed the painting was dissolved and the Salvator Mundi was sold to Baron de Lareinty of Paris. After subsequent sales the work came into the possession of the (then) present owner the Marquis de Ganay."  Salvator Mundi. Leonardo's Lost Painting??


Here is the de Ganay Salvator Mundi with pre-restoration "Simon" overlay..



































Here is the de Ganay Salvator Mundi with pre-restoration "Simon" overlay.

Clearly this painting was never lost, just beat up and mis-attributed, and recently circulated by the media as the "Simon" da Vinci.

____________________________________________________________

apropos of da Vinci, here is my student's work:

4 comments:

Michael said...

The da Vinci Project, Research Group
It is our very strong considered opinion, backed up by substantial study, that this painting must be reviewed further in light of our mounting weight of proof that the painting is NOT the work of Lionardo, but that of another lesser talent.

Owner Robert Simon, in New York, the historians, all the scholars involved, the restorer, and technical people, the team Simon put together, and The National Gallery of England, need to understand the "INTENT" of Lionardo, da Vinci the "Master" in order to make a proper assessment of the painting. It is this added dimension that is missing from the traditional authentication methods that has led to, in our opinion, an incorrect validation.

This painting, not having been the work of Lionardo, da Vinci, but perhaps a student, contains many changes, but does not have the subtle trademark processes that Lionardo put into his works of art.

Michael said...

Lionardo da Vinci: Salvator Mundi Savior of The World
michaelmwd.blogspot.com

Michael said...

Conventional Wisdom / Thinking, is not a healthy mindset, it creates a follower mentality and stifles creativity, progressive innovation and understanding. It is the safe route but in turn fosters mediocrity.... It creates gridlock.... The dark ages, where religious control was foisted on, and coupled with strict adherence to conventional thinking doctrine by the masses, was an extreme example. Today's fear of proffering a different or counter culture viewpoint in academia or research, though not engendering the physical consequences of old, still sadly inhibits the progress in understanding the truth. Though nothing new, this has been going on for thousands and thousands years, it would be far more advantageous for us, as a race and society, if we were more prone to be willing to accept and investigate new or different viewpoints, rather than be mired in, and fearful of, changes to the accepted paradigms.... We need to turn the page, wake up and entertain the possibilities.....


Founder, Michael W. Domoretsky
The da Vinci Project, Research Group
https://www.facebook.com/groups/200916973314185/

Michael said...

The da Vinci Project, Research Group

It is our very strong considered opinion, backed up by substantial study, that this painting must be reviewed further in light of our mounting weight of proof that the painting is NOT the work of Lionardo, but that of another lesser talent.

Owner Robert Simon, in New York, the historians, all the scholars involved, the restorer, and technical people, the team Simon put together, and The National Gallery of England, need to understand the "INTENT" of Lionardo, da Vinci the "Master" in order to make a proper assessment of the painting. It is this added dimension that is missing from the traditional authentication methods that has led to, in our opinion, an incorrect validation.

This painting, not having been the work of Lionardo, da Vinci, but perhaps a student, contains many changes, but does not have the subtle trademark processes that Lionardo put into his works of art.
It is a well-documented fact that lionardo da Vinci had a philosophy and penchant for infusing science and mathematics, with extreme accuracy into his every artistic endeavor. It leads to the supposition that his artworks would reflect his almost obsessive search for truth and accurate portrayal of everything around him. The artworks after all were an extension of the expression of his scientific studies. Using what is known about Lionardo from his writings and codex’s as a starting point to review the Salvatore Mundi original and "restored" images, yields a number of anomalies in the restored painting that are inconsistent with Lionardo's techniques, and his uniquely accurate portrayal of geometric symmetry, color, shadowing and scaling.
The painting, presently in the Jan Louis de Ganay collection Paris, was crafted in "RED and BLUE" clothing, and is in our opinion, the real Salvator Mundi. A detailed analysis of the measurements and proportions is a very telling indication of authenticity because of the clearly accurate alignment. Lionardo's technique of ensuring perfect ratios and alignment in his Salvatore Mundi painting may be compared to those found in his Vitruvian Man and other of his works.
Also the real Salvator Mundi painting has over 35 Symbols, in the lower half of the painting. Some are numbers, some are letters, and many are in "MICRO FORM", a process Lionardo invented to hide his intended messages.
It is unfortunate that the scholars are locked into a process that fails to consider motivation and intent because we firmly believe that these are key criteria against which Lionardo's, and the works of other artists of the period, must be tested.
As a result of our findings we strongly recommend that the "Blue" painting be reevaluated against the additional criteria we have found to be hallmarks found in all of Lionardo's works. We believe that this reevaluation will yield the finding that this is NOT the work of Lionardo.

By Michael W. Domoretsky
The da Vinci Project, Research Group