The Lost Leonardo

11th -14th December 1978 Edward could not believe what he was seeing. In Bonham's window was a Leonardo da Vinci motif: to be sold at auction on 14th December 1978 – lot number two.

“Can this be the one?” he asked himself, almost in jest. “Could this be it?”

He reached into his pocket and pulled out his 'address book'. Under Leonardo da Vinci, he found Leda and the Swan, the Madonna with the Cherries and the Holy Children Embracing. Three titles, once noted in a fit of administrative competence – he could barely remember putting the names in his notebook.

Edward collected works of art. His motto was “buy cheap” - and it was a motto that had never failed him. If he bought a painting for £200, and it turned out to be worth £20,000, he had made a huge profit, but if the auction price went over £1,500, then he would make a tactical withdrawal. So what if somebody else made £18,000 profit – they had paid £1,600 (including commission) in the first place. Besides, he may only be able to sell the £200 painting for £300, and to pay £1,100, for a £300 sale was plain stupid. “Buy low”.

Several years earlier, he had made a list. In a note-book; actually a cheap address book, he had listed painters and the works associated with them that had been 'lost' over the ages. He had not spent a great deal of time on Leonardo da Vinci because he thought the chances of finding the lost work of Leda and the Swan or the Kneeling Leda were infinitesimally small, and the chances of buying a Leonardo for £500 non-existant. But next to the Holy Children Embracing in his notebook was the name Friedländer, and Edward began to remember something.

He remembered buying a book of biblical influence – On Early Netherlandish Painters by Max J. Friedländer.

“Yes, there was a list of paintings by one of the painters that were copied from works by other authors, and the Holy Children Embracing was in that list, as was the Madonna with the Cherries”, he whispered quietly to himself. “Good old Max Friedländer. Is the old boy still alive?”

The painting in front of him was titled: The Infants Christ and St. John Embracing, dated at around 1500, and Edward wondered if this could possibly be by Leonardo. It didn't look good enough.

His notebook contained dozens of artists and hundreds of paintings – it was no use seeing a quality version of Kneeling Leda in an auction, and being gifted the painting at £600, but not knowing enough about the motif. “Knowledge is power”; another motto. Edward had listed many painters and many motifs, especially his beloved Netherlandish painters – Van Eyck, Quentin Massys, Joachim Patinir and Breughel – but he had never thought that Leda and the Swan by Leonardo would appear unnoticed. Or the Holy Children Embracing.

The painting in the window was of the Holy children, Jesus and John the Baptist, embracing – even kissing; “Probably Christ on the right”, Edward said to himself.

-1-

“Boy! Have I got some work to do before 14th?”

This was what his life was all about – this was the thrill of the chase. He dare not reveal his 'hand', and yet he needed to know everything he could possibly know about lot number 2 before the hammer went down on Thursday; especially since this was only the second lot and the auction begins at 11:00 a.m.

First of all, he had to get a closer look at the work.

He attended the preview the next morning. There was not a lot to go on; the background of the painting was 'just black'.

'This is hardly an inspiring start'.

Just above the child on the left, probably St. John the Baptist, is what looks like a leaf, so Edward asked if he could view the painting under natural light at the window. The stewards gave him permission, and so he brought the unframed panel to the big window at the front of the show-rooms.

It is not a good idea to look at 500 year-old paintings in sunlight, but that drab December day, the sun came out from behind a cloud, very briefly. The painting 'lit up' – there were leaves and rocks above both children and the background appeared to be some grotto, rather than a contrast to the bright flesh of the children.

Iconography! The wood anemones at the foot of Christ have

significance – they were supposed to have sprung up at the base of the cross when Christ was put to death. The catalogue gave the reserve at £500-£1,000, with 10% payable on purchase.

-2-

Edward left Montpelier Street in Knightsbridge and headed for a library. Not any library – he headed for the National Art Library at the Victoria and Albert Museum, just 200 meters away. He wanted to look at his beloved Friedländer, and confirm the note.

Six hours later, when the library closed, Edward had enough to satisfy Scotland yard.

Joos van Cleve copied the motifs of the Holy Children Embracing and Madonna with the Cherries from lost works by Leonardo da Vinci. That was indeed Friedländer's contribution to the research.

The German had first proposed this theory in 1916, and again in 1921 – the English language copy of his book was based on the 1921 version, but Edward had seen the original book Van Eyck bis Breughel in German (his German was very good), studying at the State Art History Archive in the Hague in Netherlands.

Edward had found The Complete Paintings of Leonardo da Vinci, by Angela Ottino della Chiesa (introduced by Leopold D. Ettlinger), published by Weidenfeld and Nicholson in 1969, and familiarised himself with Leonardo's output in painting – just 27 works – according to the Italian scholar, Chiesa. She had also written the definitive biography of Bernardino Luini – a big follower of Leonardo.

At the back of Chiesa's book, were hundreds of monochrome 'thumbnail images', and Edward had almost missed the one he was looking for; almost but – but he saw it in time.

The two children embracing. This painting of the two children [Naples, Capodimonte] is probably derived from part of the drawing above [Royal Library, Windsor].

Edward had also referred to the definitive biography of Leonardo – that by Kenneth Clark – during the day, and had asked to see the verbosely titled “A Catalogue of the Drawings of Leonardo da Vinci in the Collection of His Majesty the King at Windsor Castle” also by Kenneth Clark and published in 1935.

“We have a revision for you, sir. There is a three volume set published in 1968 / 69 by Phaidon Press – Lord Clark was assisted by Carlo Pedretti. Obviously, it is now in the Queen's collection”.

“I would like to see all three volumes, please”.

Edward had quickly discounted the third volume – the one compiled mainly by Mr Pedretti, because it was all anatomical drawings. He had scoured the pages of drawings of machines, horses, children, faces, nudes, and suddenly found what he was looking for – RL 12564. He had grabbed the other book and gone to the description of drawing 12564.

“The motif of the two Holy Children, (Jesus and John), embracing belongs to Leonardo's Milanese period, (1482-1499). It seems to have been carried out in a finished picture, now lost, and perhaps this was sent to Flanders, for nearly all the innumerable copies of the subject are Flemish. Several of these, including two by Joos van Cleve in The Hague and Naples and one by Quentin Messys at Chatsworth, are mentioned by Gustav Glück in Pantheon, II 1928”

-3-

Edward's notes reflected his thoughts through the day: Virgin of the Rocks by Leonardo. Concept by Leonardo and two versions executed mainly by LdV. Derivations of the Virgin of the Rocks – the two children with Mary – embracing, or not embracing.

Copies by Bernardino Luini and Bernardino de'Conti – and in Naples.

Lost Leonardo of the Holy Children – probably sent to Flanders. Joos van Cleve version in Naples; Quentin Massys in Chatsworth.

Gustav Glück in Pantheon from 1928. (He had found a copy of the paper, and translated some sections).

“Schicksale Einer Komposition Lionardos” Inevitable Development of a Composition by Leonardo‫‏‬

Pantheon , 10th October 1928.

There is hardly anything else that gives us such a deep insight into the essence of Renaissance art in the north as the widespread composition to be found in numerous Dutch paintings of differing worth of the two Holy Children, Jesus and John, who seated bare side by side embrace and kiss each other tenderly. Over half a dozen of these repetitions originate from the studio of one of the most significant representatives of that movement in the Netherlands, Joos van Cleve, the master painter of Antwerp.

We have long known that the delightful invention of the group of children does not originate from Joos van Cleve himself, but is to be attributed to someone much greater.

The fundamental idea of the group originates without doubt from no less a personality than Leonardo.

We can go even further: exactly the same composition as preserved in the copies of Joos van Cleve and his studio must also have existed done by Leonardo himself, to whom alone the grandeur and charm of such an invention can be attributed.

It is true that no original in his hand, (painting or cartoon), has been found, but the fact that one did exist is proved by a number of repeats, which undoubtedly originate from the Lombard school of the great master.

Edward had underlined; is proved by, must have existed, without doubt, undoubtedly; and he smiled as he thought of the legal rule his father had taught him: nemo judex in causa sua.

“Mr Glück is not only an advocate for the cause that the Holy Children Embracing by Joos van Cleve is an inevitable development of an idea and composition by Leonardo, he seems to have made the judgement as well. Perhaps that is a useful judgement to me.” Edward liked to talk to himself to come to a conclusion in his research. After just one day on the case, he had the backing of Friedländer, Angela Chiesa, Kenneth Clark, probably Carlo Pedretti and Gustav Glück. There seemed to be a Lost Leonardo of the Holy Children Embracing, and for sale at Bonham's in -4-

Montpelier Street, London, is a fifteenth century version of the painting, ascribed by Bonhams as after Giampietrino, another follower of Leonardo from Milan at the right period.

Was there a Leonardo da Vinci for sale, with an estimate of just £1,000?

Edward had just one more day, and he used it to further his cause.

According to Angela Chiesa, the three painters Bernardino Luini, Marco d'Oggiono, and Giampietrino were immediate followers of Leonardo; and the latter was responsible (or thought to be responsible) for a Kneeling Leda in Kassel in Germany. In the Netherlands, Joos van Cleve and Quentin Massys copied frequently from Leonardo's themes.

On the day before the sale, he familiarised himself with the big names in the Renaissance, and was swayed by Gustav Glück; although the fact that an original existed was not exactly proved by the existence of the Lombard paintings in Hampton Court and in the former Deotsch collection, the fact that these paintings were displayed helped the cause; there was a Lost Leonardo somewhere – perhaps he would soon be its owner.

And then came the day of the sale: 14 th December 1978.

Edward was so excited that he hardly noticed lot 1; a Flemish painting. Did it sell? He didn't know.

He had timed his arrival to perfection – found a seat fairly close to the front, but not at the front at three minutes to eleven, so he only had to wait two minutes before the auctioneer introduced proceedings.

“Lot number 2; a dark painting of the two Holy Infants, Jesus and St. John the Baptist, kissing and Embracing. This particular painting is after Giampietrino circa 1500. Some wood anemones in the foreground. Two thousand pounds? Fifteen hundred pounds? Do I hear a thousand pounds?”

“Yes, the gentleman in the middle right – one thousand pounds. Twelve hundred? Eleven hundred – do I hear one thousand one hundred pounds – maiden bid, ladies and gentlemen” [“Oh please don't prompt them” thought Edward.]

It seemed like an eternity... One thousand pounds once – twice – BANG. “It's mine”, thought Edward, “I think I have just bought one of the finest paintings in the world for the price”.

He quickly parted with cash – eleven-hundred to include the 10% commission – and took his work to a quiet alcove to get to know it – just a little bit better.

The panel was about 40cm x 60cm and the back had been covered with parchment – something that looked like it had been there for hundreds of years. The panel (the wood was poplar) had been removed from the frame, presumably because the previous owner felt the frame might raise a similar amount on its own.

Edward decided to tear the parchment off – he could see no reason to keep it.

And there it was – he could not believe his eyes – in the centre of the panel was the name he hadn't -5-

in his wildest dreams imagine would be there; and with a number – thirty-nine:

Edward was aware that the Master himself often used the spelling Lionardo – it was the Tuscan way of writing his name; but what did number 39 mean? It looked like an old collector's mark – probably 18th century, judging by the age of the parchment that lay in tatters on the floor. Why would anybody cover the back?

It would be necessary to have some restoration work done on the panel itself – it was far too dark, and there was possibly a reasonable scene waiting to be discovered. Before that happened, he would enjoy his early Christmas present to himself; Edward Bonars had bought The Lost Leonardo for eleven-hundred pounds. He would spend most of the festive season just looking at his purchase.

He quickly established that the last Leonardo to sell was the portrait of Ginevra de'Benci – bought from the Liechtenstein Family of Austria and Liechtenstein for five million US dollars, in January 1967. Should Edward's painting have been sold for £3,000,000?

Edward smiled to himself many times over the following months - “Buy low, sell high! Buy for £1,000 – sell for ten million!”

In his mind, he knew that he had bought a one-in-a-billion painting – he had bought the Lost Leonardo, and he had paid about one two-thousandth of what he should have paid (he had decided that two million pounds would have secured it for a serious collector).

His efforts at establishing the vendors were unsuccessful – the auctioneer was very discrete, but hinted that an old man had died earlier in the year, and his titled son had sent the painting to auction, knowing absolutely nothing about it. “Clearly”, thought Edward.

-6-

Spring and Summer 1979 Edward was exasperated; he was getting nowhere. He wanted things to happen and for people to believe his good fortune, but for some reason, his claims were met by deaf ears.

Twelve weeks into the year, he had some success. He was searching in Hertfordshire library for some information, and he came across an obscure letter written by the mistress of Antony van Dyke. To his astonishment, the letter mentioned twenty paintings by Sir Antony, most of which are in the National Gallery in London. Edward knew that the paintings were 'school of' van Dyke, and not attributed to the master, so he thought the NG might be grateful for the information. One of the curators was particularly grateful, and asked Edward if there was anything they could do in return.

“Let me commission your restorer to clean my painting” Very quickly, Arthur Lucas was commission to restore The Holy Children Embracing. The head of the National Gallery's restoration team does not normally take on private work, but he could see some special qualities in the wood anemones in the foreground; and was intrigued as to what may be underneath the dirt and grime and blackness.

He finished before 24th April 1979, and wrote the following in his report: On removing this semi-opaque varnish and brownish black paint there was no sign of copper resinate glazing being used over the raised, thick ivy leaves. Leonardo and his school, uniquely, never used oil glazing paints on greens and flesh colours. There was no technical reason found for toning down the foliage, so this brownish black glazing was put on probably because it was thought to be too frivolous for a religious subject.

The major change to this painting due to cleaning is the revealing of the foliage and the rocks so that the Holy Children appear to be in a grotto. The florae are drawn and painted to the highest quality, equal to those in the ‘Virgin of the Rocks’ in the National Gallery, London, or to those painted by Titian or Dürer and it was well worth the effort to reveal them.

Arthur Lucas 24th April 1979 Edward had not asked Mr. Lucas to speak so highly of his painting, so he was naturally delighted with the comments; “painted to the highest quality”; equal to Dürer or Leonardo da Vinci.

He thought that things could not get much better, but in September 1979 he was invited to meet Professor Carlo Pedretti, who was visiting London with his wife, from California. Prof. Pedretti later became the Armand Hammer Professor of Leonardo studies at UCLA, and, after Kenneth Clark died in 1983, the undisputed champion of Leonardo in the world – his output on the master has been staggering. The difficulty that his encyclopaedic knowledge of Leonardo gave, was that everyone else seemed to know less than Pedretti – and his word often became 'law', whether he -7-

meant it to or not (usually not).

In October 1979, Edward received a letter from Carlo, containing the following supportive comments: “Thank you for showing me your painting of Leonardo’s Holy Children”. Not your studio copy or studio work, but Leonardo's Holy children.

Edward had hinted that letters from the Netherlands in 1516/1529 indicated that Leonardo was involved in the production of such a painting in Antwerp or Mechelen in the early 16 th century. “... much more convincing is the evidence provided by the painting itself which I do not hesitate to recognise as being done by the same hand as the London Virgin of the Rocks .”

His concluding paragraph put the icing on the cake! “... above all, the scientific character of the extraordinary background of rocks and vegetation that is so intimately related to everything Leonardo did in his study of natural forms.”

The letter was on UCLA headed paper, with Department of Art History at the top, signed Carlo Pedretti, and dated 14th October 1979.

Short of saying; “this painting is by Leonardo da Vinci”, a better endorsement could not have been obtained.

But then everything went quiet. The provenance of the work was not revealing itself: still no word on where the painting might have come from, or when the No 39 was painted on the panel.

During 1979, he confirmed that Kenneth Clark, Max Friedländer, Gustav Glück, Carlo Pedetti and Angela Chiesa had all linked the motif of the Holy Children embracing to Leonardo and mentioned the 'missing original' – Carlo had even spoken volumes about Edward's painting being intimately related to Leonardo's studies, and not dismissed the possibility of No 39 being the lost original.

We move forward a few years; to 1985.

-8-

Summer 1985 About the same time as Edward had been trying to get some support for his ownership of the Lost Leonardo, an art historian in Chicago was in the process of publishing an essay about 'A composition by Joos van Cleve', the Holy children embracing. The essay appeared in the Bulletin of the Art Institute of Chicago in February 1979, and contained just one image – that of the painting attributed to Joos van Cleve in the Institute (and bought in 1975). The author, Ilse Hecht, revised and enhanced her essay over the next two years, and in April 1981, it was published in the art magazine Apollo in London, under the verbose title; The Infants Christ and St. John Embracing.

Notes on a Composition by Joos van Cleve. Edward had found the article in 1982, and read and reread the essay; it said everything that Glück had written in 1928 and more; Glück was referenced two or three times. In 1983, John Shearman had The Early Italian Pictures in the Collection of Her Majesty the Queen published by Cambridge University Press, and he too referenced Glück in an essay on the painting ascribed to Marco d'Oggiono at Hampton Court. Hecht also showed an image of the painting in Hampton Court – but it was evident that Shearman had not been aware of the Apollo article when Early Italian Pictures was published, because he describes Glück's article as the most thorough treatment of the motif. Shearman (pronounced Sherman) mentioned a painting in the Doetsch collection, clearly from a Lombard hand, but there was no reproduction of this work – Glück had also mentioned the name Doetsch in 1928.

By the early summer of 1985, although Edward had done very little work on his Leonardo, (by now in a vault in London – he had returned to the Netherlands where he had 260 days per year access to the Royal Library and the 'rKD' the Rijksbureau voor Kunsthistorisches Documentatie (the state art history archive), he was making progress. [There was a library at the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam with some rare and informative books.] His list of supporting experts had risen by two – Ilse Hecht and Professor John Shearman, and he had engaged the services of two analysts to shed further light on the provenance of his painting.

Chemical Analysis.

A lady at the National Gallery had recommended a German chemist to undertake a chemical analysis of some of the paints used in The Holy Children. This technique cannot authenticate a painting, but it can eliminate certain inaccuracies. Dr. Kuhn confirmed that the painting came undoubtedly from Northern Italy – some of the chemicals found in the poplar of the panel and in the paints only came from Northern Italy – there was nothing from the Rome area or Northern Europe.

Also, many of the flecks of paint were extremely complex in composition; something an artist like Leonardo would have done, but not necessarily a student or copyist.

The date of the paint was also in the right area +/- 20 years around 1490 – right when Leonardo was in Milan in northern Italy.

-9-

Geometric Analysis Many experts dismiss this as nonsense, but I believe that there is one valuable conclusion that can be reached by it. If a painting is in perfect proportion; that is, the golden ratio (1.618:1) is used over and over again, all sorts of geometric shapes, especially pentagons and pentagrams, can be drawn 'on the work' and parts of the bodies coincide exactly to key points on the painting. Leonardo could paint in perfect proportion. What the geometric analysts claim is that there may be some complex under-drawing that was used to create the work. I have in my possession a copy of a painting of the two holy children that looks awful – every proportion is wrong. The analyst who looked at Edward's painting concluded that it was by Leonardo and not one of his pupils because it satisfied all of his geometric tests. But infra-red reflectography (or x-ray) showed no geometric underdrawing. The same analysis would prove that this painting is not by Leonardo, but anybody can tell it is not by Leonardo, simply by looking at it!

This may be an interesting addition to our knowledge of the subject matter, or it may provide some amusement; one thing is certain – it is not a painting from the studio of Leonardo in Milan prior to 1499.

By 1985, Edward had two supporters – Franz Gnaedinger was convinced that his painting was by Leonardo because it fit all of his geometric criteria; Herman Kuhn was convinced that the painting was not from Florence or the Netherlands, and Milan seemed as good a Northern Italian city as any in about 1485-95.

Also in 1985, Carlo Pedretti wrote to keep abreast of developments – the provenance still needed researching – there was still no answer to the mystery number 39.

- 10 -