Attribution file · Milan · around 1495?
The Beautiful Princess
A portrait of Leonardo da Vinci - or one of the most discussed attributions of the 21st century?
The profile, vellum, left-handed hatching and a missing leaf of the Sforziada have fueled a spectacular attribution. But the incomplete provenance, the unusual support and several stylistic reservations prevent any unanimous verdict.
Disputed attribution
The short answer
Can we say he's a Leonard?
Not as an established fact. The Beautiful Princess has characteristics compatible with Leonardo's Milanese environment and certain specialists defend its attribution to the master. Other experts in Leonardo's drawings refuse it.
The historically honest formula is therefore: portrait attributed to Leonardo da Vinci, contested attribution. Uncertainty does not diminish the interest of the work; it makes it a textbook case on the way in which a consensus is constructed - or fails to be constructed -.
The material, the costume and certain graphic gestures are compatible with the Milanese Renaissance.
The favorable file brings together style, technique and supposed provenance.
Several major specialists do not accept the award.
I · The favorable file
Why do some specialists see Leonardo there?
Martin Kemp, Pascal Cotte and other attribution advocates do not rely on a single "miracle index". Their thesis is based on the convergence of several observations.
A psychological presence
The profile remains codified, but the mouth and the eye introduce a mobile expression. The defenders recognize the Leonardian desire to make the interior life felt.
Left-handed hatching
Several oblique lines descend in a natural direction for a left hand. Leonardo was left-handed, but this concordance is not enough to identify him.
Nodes and interlacing
The sleeve and the hairstyle develop a vocabulary of interlacing close to Leonardo's graphic and decorative research in Milan.
Milanese fashion from the 1490s
The coazzone hairstyle, fishnet and costume would place the model in the court of the Sforza, when Leonardo worked for Ludovico il Moro.
II · The book hypothesis
The missing sheet of the Sforziada
The heart of historical reconstruction
In 2011, Martin Kemp and Pascal Cotte compared vellum to a copy of the Sforziada by Giovanni Simonetta, printed in 1490 and richly illuminated, now kept in Warsaw.
The book is said to have belonged to Galeazzo Sanseverino, husband of Bianca Sforza. The portrait could have been inserted on the occasion of their wedding, then removed. Format, quality of the vellum and sewing marks were compared to a missing sheet.
This reconstruction gives a name, a date and a function to the portrait. But it remains a hypothesis: material resemblance does not constitute a continuous chain of provenance.
III · The critical file
Why does attribution remain contested?
The objections are not limited to an instinctive refusal of a "new Leonardo". They relate to the support, style, provenance and real value of scientific examinations.
A Leonardo on vellum?
No other unanimously accepted drawing by Leonardo uses exactly this type of prepared and colored vellum.
An outline considered too firm
Some specialists find the profile, eye and neck less flexible than in the master's autograph drawings.
A long documentary silence
The ancient history of the leaf is not continuous. It appears publicly as a 19th century pastiche.
Support is not author
Carbon-14 can date vellum; he cannot sign the drawing. An old support can be used later.
An insufficient trace
The publicized digital brand does not offer the details necessary for indisputable individual identification.
A connection discussed
The correspondence of holes and format did not convince all manuscript and drawing specialists.
IV · The trap of spectacular proof
Fingerprint does not close survey
A match is not an identification
The press has widely taken up the idea of an imprint comparable to a trace of Saint Jerome from Leonardo. This wording gave the impression of a test as precise as a criminal expertise.
However, a partial mark, without a complete set of minutiae and without a sufficient reproducible protocol, does not allow Leonardo to be identified. The argument has also lost its central place in subsequent favorable publications.
The same principle applies to left-handed hatching: they are compatible with Leonardo, but an informed artist can imitate them.
V · Compare without confusing
Three works to measure similarities
A useful comparison doesn't just look for similarities. It also observes differences in support, construction and presence.
A feminine head
The curls, inclined profile and modeling offer similar vocabulary. But the freedom of drawing and the status of this sheet are not identical to those of The Beautiful Princess.
Ginevra de' Benci
Recognized work, painted on panel: the three-quarter rotation and atmospheric transitions show how Leonardo goes beyond the heraldic profile.
See reproduction
The Lady with the Ermine
Painted in Milan, it provides the best court context. The body pivots, the hands act and the light constructs a very different presence from the still profile.
See reproductionVI · An attribution in motion
Case timeline
Sale at Christie's
The sheet is proposed in New York as a work of the German school of the early 19th century, under the title Head of a Young Girl in Profile. It is sold for $19,000 excluding fees.
New buyer, new investigation
The portrait is resold with the same attribution. Peter Silverman and the owner undertake technical and historical research.
The Leonard Hypothesis is published
Alessandro Vezzosi, Martin Kemp, Pascal Cotte and other specialists defend a Milanese creation by Léonard.
Reconciliation with Warsaw
The National Library of Poland announces the study of the possible link with its copy of the Sforziada.
Exhibition in Monza
The sheet is shown at Villa Reale. The same year, forger Shaun Greenhalgh claimed to have made it in the 1970s.
No consensus
The work remains in private collection. It continues to be described as attributed to Leonardo rather than as a unanimously autograph drawing.
VII · How is an attribution judged?
Four pieces of evidence need to be strengthened
The eye
Quality of the drawing, anatomy, draping, modeling and comparison with recognized sheets.
The material
Vellum, pigments, binders, aging, restorations and subsequent interventions.
The documents
Inventories, sales, correspondence, collectible marks and ownership history.
The context
Plausible command, identity of the model, function of the portrait and circulation of the object.
VIII · Visible quality
What the debate should not erase
A subtle object, whatever its author
The portrait combines an almost heraldic silhouette with a very fragile surface. The knots of the garment respond to the stitches of the hairstyle; the very light nape stands out from the warm background; the eye, seen in profile, maintains an attentive presence.
Recognizing this quality does not amount to signing the drawing. Art history distinguishes aesthetic appreciation from attribution: a work can be remarkable and remain anonymous.
The cautious verdict
A possible attribution, not demonstrated at the consensus level
The favorable file is more constructed than a simple intuition: Milanese context, left hand, old materials, quality of the drawing and hypothesis of the Sforziada. But none of these pieces are decisive in isolation, and several are discussed.
"The Beautiful Princess, circa 1495 -1496, attributed to Leonardo da Vinci; contested attribution; private collection."
Two excesses must be avoided: announcing a "Recovered Leonardo" as a certainty, or transforming objections into automatic proof of a modern forgery.
Explore recognized portraits
Leonardo da Vinci in the store
Frequently asked questions
Understand everything about The Beautiful Princess
Is The Beautiful Princess by Leonardo da Vinci?
The attribution to Leonardo is defended by Martin Kemp and several specialists, but it is not accepted by consensus. The most rigorous formulation remains "attributed to Leonardo da Vinci".
Who would be the young woman represented?
Martin Kemp proposed Bianca Sforza, natural daughter of Ludovico Sforza and wife of Galeazzo Sanseverino. This identification depends on the supposed link with the Warsaw Sforziada and also remains debated.
When would the portrait have been taken?
If it is indeed Milanese and linked to the marriage of Bianca Sforza, it dates from the mid-1490s, often around 1495 -1496.
What is the technique of The Beautiful Princess?
Brown pen and ink, black, red and white chalks and highlights on vellum, today laminated to an oak panel.
What are its dimensions?
Approximately 33 × 23.9 cm. It is therefore a small sheet, not an oil painting.
Why is Sforziada important?
The portrait could come from an illuminated copy of the Sforziada kept in Warsaw. The format of the vellum and traces of binding have been compared to a missing sheet, but this connection is contested.
Fingerprint proves attribution?
No. A digital trace has been publicized as compatible with an imprint present on another work, but it is not complete enough or sufficiently documented to identify a person with certainty.
Does carbon 14 prove that the drawing is by Leonardo?
No. It dates the vellum, not the artist's gesture. A forger can work on an old medium; conversely, an old vellum remains compatible with a Renaissance creation.
Did Shaun Greenhalgh really paint the portrait?
The British forger claimed this in 2015, but his account has not been independently demonstrated. This statement fuels doubt without constituting definitive proof.
Where to see The Beautiful Princess?
The drawing belongs to a private collection and is not permanently exhibited in a museum. It was notably shown at the Villa Reale in Monza in 2015.
Sources and credits
Christie's - 1998 sale · National Library of Poland - study of the Sforziada · Martin Kemp - favorable position · Katarzyna Krzyglasagórska-Pisarek - critical arguments · The New Yorker - investigation into the attribution file.
Images: Wikimedia Commons - The Beautiful Princess, The Sforziada, monza exhibition. Ginevra de' Benci: National Gallery of Art, public domain.
0 comments