NGV announces that Van Gogh Museum finds 'Head of a man' is not by Vincent van Gogh

NGV Director Gerard Vaughan today announced findings from the Van Gogh Museum’s analysis of the NGV’s painting, Head of a man, traditionally given to Vincent van Gogh.

The Van Gogh Museum in Amsterdam believes the painting is not by Vincent van Gogh. The Museum concludes that it is not a forgery, but rather is by an as yet unidentified contemporary of Van Gogh.

The Van Gogh Museum based its findings on perceived stylistic differences between the NGV’s painting and other portraits and self-portraits by Van Gogh from around the mid to late 1880s.

The Museum did not find material qualities, either in the canvas or paint which were not contemporaneous with Van Gogh. In other words, there were no “modern pigments” in the work which could only have existed after Van Gogh’s time.

However, the Museum did find that some qualities relating to how the ground layer was applied occurred in no other picture they have analysed, and would thus make this picture unique within Van Gogh’s accepted oeuvre, leading to the conclusion that it is not by Van Gogh. They also concluded that the use of pure ochre as found in the painting is unlike any other works by Van Gogh known at this time, and is therefore anomalous.

 

The report also bases some of its conclusions on the inability to identify a sitter, the difficulty of establishing provenance before the 1920s, and the fact that there are no concrete references to the painting in Van Gogh’s letters.

NGV Director Dr Gerard Vaughan said that the NGV accepted the Van Gogh Museum’s findings.  He acknowledged that the painting had always been regarded as ‘off beat’ and difficult to slot into the accepted chronological development of Van Gogh’s style. 

The NGV was fully committed to researching its holdings and to seeking the most expert opinions in relation to attribution.  He said that while naturally the NGV was disappointed that the work now appears not to be by Van Gogh, such a reattribution should also be seen as part of the normal work of a public gallery.

“This picture has been in our collection since 1940, when the NGV acquired the work from the French and British Contemporary Art exhibition which toured Australia in 1939 -1940.”

“It was purchased as a Van Gogh work, and had been accepted as a Van Gogh for more than a decade before the NGV’s purchase. It has been included in every catalogue raisonné of the artist’s work by eminent Van Gogh scholars, and has been included without question in major touring exhibitions”, said Dr Vaughan.

“The reattribution of paintings is part of the daily life in any major gallery with a large and complex collection,” said Dr Vaughan. “We regularly change the labels to reflect new research and scholarly opinion.

“In the recent past, we have upgraded the attribution of several key works. Further major news I can announce today is that we have just confirmed with leading international experts the reattribution of a major work: Grand Canal looking north-east to the Rialto Bridge from Studio of Canaletto to Bernardo Bellotto, Canaletto’s nephew and one of the greatest view painters of the 18th century. 

“Changes in attribution need to be seen in this broader context.”

Over recent years, the following major NGV works have also been reattributed positively, following intensive consultation with leading international authorities.

* A monk with a book  from 16th century Northern Italian to Titian
* St George slaying the dragon, from 15th century Florentine to Uccello
* Kissing babes,  from Unknown to Auguste Rodin
* Portrait of a gentleman, from Unknown 18th French century to Louis Tocqué (French 1696-1772)
* Portrait of Rembrandt, from Rembrandt to Unknown, and then recently returned to Rembrandt’s studio
* Doge Pietro Loredano by Tintoretto, thought by many to be a copy.  New technical examination has now  revealed changes to the painting that could only be by Tintoretto, and thus it is now accepted as the authentic first version of this famous portrait
* Rachel du Ruvigny by van Dyck, considered a studio copy. After direct comparison with the version in Cambridge and exhaustive technical examination, the NGV’s painting is now recognised as the primary version by van Dyck, not a studio copy. 

Dr Vaughan said that since the gallery was established nearly 150 years ago, many works have had their attribution changed, and this is standard practice in every art gallery in the world.

“Scholars across the world constantly review and argue about the authorship of artworks, especially masterpieces, often holding differing views. At the NGV, we always welcome and participate in such debates”, said Dr Vaughan.

The Van Gogh Museum undertook a three phase approach to analysis of Head of a man:

Scientific analysis. Samples were taken by the Van Gogh Museum and were analysed by the Institute of Dutch Cultural Heritage, which regularly undertakes scientific analysis on behalf of major Dutch museums.

    
X-ray techniques. The canvas was only truly visible under radiograph

Visual connoisseurship. This involved expert comparison with other works from similar time and place, and also Van Gogh’s earlier works, both under microscope and by making observations on general style and technique.

The Van Gogh Museum in Amsterdam has the largest holding of the artist’s work in the world, and is uniquely placed to undertake this comparative process.

Finally, who was the painter?

"It is possible that one day evidence will emerge which will help us identify this interesting artist", said Dr Vaughan

- ends -

 

 

HEAD OF A MAN
BACKGROUND INFORMATION

Head of a man
oil on canvas mounted on panel
33.0 x 40.0 cm
Felton Bequest, 1940

Van Gogh Museum’s findings on Head of a man

The Van Gogh Museum has undertaken detailed analysis addressing the technical and connoisseurship issues of Head of a man, and provided a judgment, which we are releasing today.

The main conclusion by the Van Gogh Museum is that in their opinion the painting should not be attributed to Van Gogh, but nor is it a forgery. That is to say, it is a picture dating from the mid – late 1880s by an artist other than Vincent van Gogh. The Museum points out some perceived stylistic differences between our painting and other works by Van Gogh from around the mid 1880s.

They did not find material qualities, either in the canvas or paint that were not contemporaneous with Van Gogh. In other words there were no “modern pigments” in the work that could only exist after Van Gogh’s time. However, their technical analysis identified some qualities in the way the ground layer was applied not present in any other painting by Van Gogh; if accepted as Van Gogh, this would be unique in his oeuvre, thus leading to the conclusion that it is not by Van Gogh.

They also concluded that the use of pure ochre as found in the painting is unlike any other works by Van Gogh known at this time and therefore would be an anomaly.

The report also bases some of its conclusions on the inability to identify a sitter, the difficulty of establishing provenance before the 1920s, and the fact that there are no concrete references to the painting in Van Gogh’s letters.

The findings suggest that the painting is by an as yet unidentified contemporary of Van Gogh.

The report summarises various opinions about the work since it first appeared in the 1920s, including the opinions of numerous authorities who supported the attribution to Van Gogh.

The Van Gogh Museum report states that Head of a man is not a forgery. Probably the work was painted in the mid-late 1880s. The NGV believes that as Van Gogh was unable to sell paintings at this time it would be unreasonable to think that a contemporary would try to forge one and pass it off as a Van Gogh.

The Van Gogh Museum concluded that as far as they can ascertain at present the work was painted by a contemporary of Van Gogh. They could not single out a particular artist as the author. However, they consider it to be by an artist working at the same time as Van Gogh, possibly in Paris and that the work’s style was influenced by the same artists who also influenced Van Gogh.

NGV’s response

This is the most thorough examination and consideration of the painting that has been undertaken to this day. Therefore we will be altering the attribution of the work in line with the Van Gogh Museum’s findings.

Current location of Head of a man, and future display

The painting is currently still with the Van Gogh Museum in Amsterdam. It will be returned to Melbourne very soon.

The NGV will continue to display Head of a man to the public.  There is still much to be learned and understood about this work. It is important therefore to keep an open mind, and for this reason we will continue to keep this work on public display. It remains a fine and interesting painting, and it is always possible that one day more information might emerge allowing us to identify the artist.

Provenance of painting
 
* Unknown collector “S” Berlin (no date), Galerie Goldschmidt & Co. Berlin (by 1928)
* Galerie Gurlitt, Berlin (no date) Galerie Abels, Cologne
* Collector “X” Cologne (no date)
* Galerie Goyert, Cologne and Kunsthandel (no date)
* J.J. ‘Biesing, The Hague (no date)
* collection “X.à la Haye, The Hague: Collection of De Groot, The Hague (no date)
* Frederik Muller (auction), Amsterdam, 13 June 1933, lot 17
* GA Stein Gallery, Paris, by 1937
* Lieutenant Victor Alexander Cazalet, Cranbrook, Kent and London, 1939
* National Gallery of Victoria (acquired by the Felton Bequest), 1940

Attempts to trace the provenance back earlier than 1928 have been hindered as the files of all the galleries through which it passed were destroyed during World War 2.

Details of NGV acquisition of the painting  

The work was purchased in 1940 by the Felton Bequest and gifted to the NGV from the French and British Contemporary Art exhibition. The Felton Bequest purchased the work for 2,196 pounds.

Impact of reattribution of painting

The work is currently valued at $5 million in the NGV’s accounting records. The total carrying value of the State Collection is well in excess of $2.5 billion.

There will be a downwards adjustment which will be reflected in the NGV's financial statements for 2006/07. The NGV revalues the State Collection every three years and the next revaluation is due in 2008. We anticipate overall a substantial upwards revaluation of the Collection, given the huge lift in the international art market. The downwards adjustment in value relating to the current work will, therefore, be insignificant. 

As the work was acquired through gift nearly 70 years ago there are no legal claims that can be made and no insurance implications.

Background to Van Gogh attribution 

The work was given to Van Gogh when it first came on the art market in the 1920s. The attribution of Head of a man to Van Gogh has been supported and published widely, most notably in J. B. de la Faille, L'Oeuvre de Vincent van Gogh, Paris, 1928, no. F209, which is still the most extensive catalogue, of which an update was published in 1970.

Following the appearance of a number of forged Van Goghs, coming on the market by a forger named Wacker, De la Faille reassessed and rewrote parts of his book when he published his catalogue in 1928. He eliminated what he believed were the doubtful works. That he retained the current painting as genuine is notable.

It has been included in most major Van Gogh studies since De la Faille. It was also included in the important exhibition of Van Gogh portraits in Detroit, Philadelphia and Boston in 2000.

Notable Exhibitions

 Van Gogh Portraits
* The Detroit Institute of Arts: 12 March 2000 - 04 June 2000
* Museum of Fine Arts, Boston: 02 July 2000 - 24 September 2000
* Philadelphia Museum of Art: 22 October 2000 - 14 January 2001

 Van Gogh in Britain: Pioneer Collectors
* Compton Verney, Warwickshire, England: 31 March 2006 - 18 June 2006
* The Dean Gallery, National Galleries of Scotland, Edinburgh: 07 July 2006 - 24 September 2006

Questioning of attribution to van Gogh

In March 2006 Head of a man was lent to Van Gogh in Britain: Pioneer Collectors, an exhibition held at Compton Verney, Warwickshire, and the Dean Gallery in Edinburgh. The curator Mr Martin Bailey, who is well regarded for his knowledge of Van Gogh and has published many articles on the artist, including a body of work on Van Gogh fakes and forgeries, accepted the long-established attribution of the NGV’s painting.

In July 2006 the renowned scholar and critic Ronald Pickvance published in the Burlington Magazine a review of the 2006 exhibition Van Gogh in Britain in which Head of a man was included. He questioned the attribution of a number of paintings by Van Gogh, including the NGV’s work. He thought it was by one of Van Gogh’s fellow students in Antwerp, who was working in the same vein as the young Vincent. He wrote that it was:

“…more likely to be by one of his (Van Gogh’s) competent fellow students in Antwerp” (Burlington Magazine July 2006, p. 501).

In a later review of that exhibition, published by London’s Sunday Times in August 2006 the art critic Frank Whitord also asserted that the work had been incorrectly attributed to Van Gogh.

Following Mr Whitford’s review, the story was reported by various international and Australian media outlets.

None of the critics at any time called the work a forgery. In their opinion it was simply not by Van Gogh.

Steps taken to review attribution

In August 2006 the NGV requested that the Van Gogh Museum in Amsterdam examine the picture, and provide expert opinion by analysing the work using the specialized technical and research resources at the Van Gogh Museum. The Van Gogh Museum kindly agreed.

At the close of the exhibition in Edinburgh, Head of a man was sent to Amsterdam for examination. 

Major positive NGV reattributions 

This is not the first time, nor will it be the last, that major NGV works have been reattributed. Scholarship and connoisseurship, and new techniques in scientific analysis, are ongoing.  In many cases our paintings have been reattributed to more significant artists than they once were.

Since the gallery was established nearly 150 years ago, many works have had their attribution changed. This is driven by new scholarship, supported by new scientific research. This is standard practice in every art gallery in the world. It is NGV’s core business and duty to research its paintings.

There are a considerable number of works in the NGV collections currently being studied.

Scholars across the world constantly review and debate the authorship of artworks, even well known masterpieces. Very often scholars express differing views on a range of pieces. The NGV always welcomes and participates in such debates.

We have a painting now given to the great Florentine master Uccello which was acquired in 1949 as a Domenico di Bartolo;  In the past 25 years, all of Uccello’s paintings have been reassessed and our work is now considered by many leading scholars as an undoubted Uccello. The same can be said for our Titian monk with a book c 1550. Purchased as a Titian in 1924, it was demoted in a new catalogue raisonné in 1973 as inauthentic, but has now been fully restored to the canon of authentic works by Titian scholars. 

Other key works that have been reattributed to well known masters include:

* Grand Canal looking north-east to the Rialto Bridge from Studio of Canaletto to Bernardo Bellotto

* Kissing babes  from Unknown to Auguste Rodin

* Portrait of a gentleman  from Unknown 18th century French to Louis Tocqué (French 1696-1772)

* Portrait of Rembrandt from Rembrandt, to Unknown in the 1990s to Rembrandt’s studio, on the evidence of new scientific research

* Doge Pietro Loredano by Tintoretto thought by many to be a copy. Technical examination revealed changes to the painting that could only be by Tintoretto, thus it is now undoubtedly the authentic primary version of this portrait

* Rachel de Ruvigny by van Dyck was considered by some scholars to be a copy. After direct comparison with the version in Cambridge and exhaustive technical examination, the NGV’s painting is now recognised to be the primary version by van Dyck.

Negative reattributions

Portrait of Rembrandt was bought in 1933 from the famous collection of the Dukes of Portland as an undoubted Rembrandt masterpiece. In the 1980s the prestigious Rembrandt Research Project informed the NGV that they believed that the painting was not by Rembrandt.  Only recently they reassessed their findings and now believe that it did indeed come from Rembrandt’s studio, and was painted before his eyes by assistants. This apparent turn-around perfectly illustrates the complexities of attribution and what a minefield it can be. We are pleased to say that even after it was “demoted” in the 1980s the NGV continued to display the painting.

Other comments

The NGV has thousands of paintings in its collections. It is not possible exhaustively to test every one of them, and more often than not the Gallery does so in response to scholarly enquiry. In this case, the NGV immediately responded, by involving the world’s leading Van Gogh research centre in the subject.

Before the doubts about the authorship of Head of a man were published in August last year, the NGV felt that there was no reason to undertake detailed research into the painting. When doubts were publicly raised the Gallery took the matter very seriously and asked the Van Gogh Museum in Amsterdam if their experts would be willing to examine the painting. We have always regarded the picture as ‘off beat’ and have never regarded it as one of the NGV’s great masterpieces.

Our collection is continually coming under the spotlight and we welcome this scrutiny by the world’s leading experts. We participate and contribute to these ongoing debates about authorship. We are pleased to report that because of scholarship undertaken by NGV staff that a number of works have been reattributed to major masters.

VAN GOGH MUSEUM MEDIA CONTACT DETAILS

Natalie Bos
Press Officer

Landline Phone: +31 (0)20 5705 292
Mobile: +31 (0)6 52490704
Email: pressoffice@vangoghmuseum.nl
Amsterdam – 8 hours Australian Eastern Standard Time

NGV MEDIA CONTACT DETAILS

Sue Coffey
Head of Media & Public Affairs

Landline Phone: +613 8620 2346
Mobile: +61417 558 511
Email: sue.coffey@ngv.vic.gov.au

Kitty Walker
Media & Public Affairs Coordinator

Landline Phone: +613 8620 2411
Mobile: +61417 575 088
Email: kitty.walker@ngv.vic.gov.au