"St. Jerome" Parmigianino - a fake? Investigation of scandal surrounding falsification of paintings continues Automatic translate

PARIS. Painting "Saint Jerome" (Saint Jerome) attributed to Parmigianino (Parmigianino) , may be involved in a scandal involving private collectors, a large auction house and famous museums. There is reason to believe that the picture is a fake.

The scandal that erupted around the list of paintings, in which this work ended up, recently surprised the art market and discovered the existence of a large network of counterfeiters. The investigation, which is currently engaged in the French police, has been ongoing since the summer of this year. The case involved a major French collector and art dealer Giuliano Ruffini (Giuliano Ruffini). The list of fakes included famous paintings that had previously been identified as works including Lucas Cranach Elder and Gentileschi. A number of large galleries and experts are taking part in the investigation. Together with the police, they intend to unravel the story, which promises to be the biggest scam in the last 100 years. In total, 25 paintings worth 220 million euros are under suspicion.

Parmigianino - Saint Jerome

“Saint Jerome,” whose authenticity was in question, was sold at Sotheby’s for $ 850,000 in 2008 as a work by an artist belonging to the Parmigianino circle. In 2014, the private collector who owned it lent the painting to the Metropolitan Museum of Art for an exhibition that began in April of that year and ended in February of the following. The representative of the Metropolitan Museum of Art said in an interview with Art Newspaper that prior to the exhibition, the work was carefully examined by the restorers of the painting department, who additionally invited other experts on the work of Parmigianino. At that time, experts argued about only one thing, whether the author himself is Parmigianino or one of his followers.

Now the auction should re-run a series of tests, including the infrared trace (a method that allows access to the main part of the figure) and a full analysis of the pigments used. Recall that Sotheby’s was not the first time in a situation where a painting sold at auction was a fake. A similar situation occurred a few years ago with a painting attributed to the Dutch portrait painter Frans Hals and sold for € 9.4 million to American collector Richard Herden. At that time, it was the ink analysis carried out by leading experts from Orion Analytical who worked on a contract at the auction that made it possible to conclude that the picture is actually a fake. Synthetic materials were discovered in the paint, first obtained in the twentieth century and which, naturally, could not be in the picture painted 300 years ago. The auction was forced to return the money to the buyer. It is interesting that the former owner of the fake Hals did not pay compensation to the auction house, claiming that the picture was real and requiring additional examinations.

The scandal surrounding fakes cast doubt on the work of the world’s best museums - the Metropolitan, the National Gallery in London and the Louvre in Paris. Experts fear that further investigation may have serious legal and financial consequences for many.

Before the "St. Jerome" first hit the auction catalogs in 2008, a link to the picture was present in at least nine articles and books. In some of them, the author of the painting was called Parmigianino, in others - an unknown artist. In an article in the Prospettiva magazine, 16th-century art expert Mario Di Giampaolo says the painting was most likely painted in Bologna, around 1530. The expert connects her with two other paintings made at the same time and in the same city. Di Giampaolo’s theory provoked a heated debate among historians, some supported it, others questioned it.

The authorship of a particular work of art, as you know, is not an exact science. “Regardless of authorship, the highest quality, technical virtuosity and the power of emotions make Saint Jerome an exceptionally good example of mannerism in Northern Italy in the 16th century,” this characteristic is given in one of the articles. But today the debate is not so much about authorship, but about the authenticity of the picture.

Giuliano Ruffini, a collector, a former owner of the painting, claims that it is genuine, stating at the same time that it is art historians, gallery owners and restorers who are primarily responsible for the attribution of the painting.

Anna Sidorova © Gallerix.ru