True or false Van Gogh?
Vincent van Gogh is one of the most copied and contested artists in history. For a century, experts and museums have been refocusing, authenticating or debating paintings in his name. How do you decide that a Van Gogh is real? Overview between the most famous scam, a recent "resurrection" and the scientific methods that decide.
There is no single test: everything is convergence
Authenticating a Van Gogh is not looking for a stamp or a signature. It’s bringing together several clues: there provenance (canvas History), thematerials analysis, the x-rays, there correspondence from the painter and the catalog raisonné. When these threads cross, the verdict becomes solid.
History shows the fragility of expertise: in 1928, the greatest specialists certified more than thirty paintings false. Conversely, a painting relegated to an attic for a century was recognized as authentic in 2013. The boundary between true and false is earned by accumulation of evidence, never by intuition alone.
The Otto Wacker affair, or blinded expertise
In 1928, the Berlin merchant Otto Wacker sold around thirty "Van Goghs" on the market, which he presented as coming from an anonymous Russian collector. The cover is perfect: the paintings were said to have been smuggled out of Russia to Switzerland. Several leading experts - Jacob Baart de la Faille, Hendrik Bremmer, Julius Meier-Graefe, Hans Rosenhagen - issue certificates of authenticity without requiring serious provenance.
The Cassirer, Thannhauser, Matthiesen and Goldschmidt galleries buy. But as a major exhibition at Paul Cassirer approaches, planned to accompany the publication of de la Faille's catalog, directors Grete Ring and Walter Feilchenfeldt spot anomalies and return the paintings. The investigation identifies around thirty-three suspicious paintings, all provided by Wacker. The investigation identifies around thirty-three suspicious paintings, all provided by Wacker. The forgeries probably include the work of his brother, the painter and restorer Leonhard Wacker.
"A resin used to speed up drying, absent from any real Van Gogh."Analysis by the National Gallery, Berlin, 1929
Otto Wacker entered the art trade and built a reputation for reliability.
Cassirer exhibition reveals impostures; de la Faille publishes a supplement listing forgeries.
De la Faille lists 174 paintings that he considers counterfeits.
Wacker was sentenced to 19 months in prison and a fine of 30,000 marks.
The forgotten painting that turned out to be true
Painted on July 4, 1888 in the scrubland around Arles, with the ruins of Montmajour Abbey in the background, this landscape has a singular destiny. Inventoried in 1890 in Théo's collection, sold in 1901, then acquired in 1908 by the Norwegian industrialist Christian Nicolai Mustad, it was stored in the attic after a French diplomat doubted its authenticity.
In the 1990s, the Van Gogh Museum discarded it because the painting was unsigned. But in 2011, a two-year investigation was opened. The analysis reveals a range of pigments identical to that of Arles paintings from the same period. Above all, a letter from Vincent to his brother Théo, dated July 5, 1888, precisely describes the painted landscape "yesterday, at sunset".
On September 9, 2013, the Van Gogh Museum publicly announced authentication: Sunset at Montmajour becomes Van Gogh's first full-frame painting confirmed since... 1928.
The Sunflowers: masterpieces or copies?
The series of Sunflowers d'Arles has several versions. One of them, purchased in 1987 by the Japanese insurer Yasuda for the equivalent of $39.9 million - an absolute record at the time - was the subject of controversy: some saw it as a copy of Émile Schuffenecker, or even Paul Gauguin. The majority of experts maintain that it is indeed a Van Gogh.
For doubt
The Tokyo version was expanded with strips of canvas added later, presumably by Schuffenecker, the first owner.
Style and covers
The "wet" covers reported in the rehearsals of January 1889 plead for a single hand, that of Vincent.
Dominant verdict
Recent analyzes and the consensus of the Van Gogh Museum consider the painting to be authentic.
Six methods for deciding
We reconstruct the history of the painting, sale by sale. In the Wacker affair, the "anonymous Russian collector" does not stand up to scrutiny: no family record bears witness to this.
Vincent's letters to Theo are a gold mine: Montmajour was authenticated using the letter of July 5, 1888 describing the landscape.
Chemist AM de Wild showed that the colors of the fake Wackers did not match Van Gogh's palette.
Restaurateur Kurt Wehlte revealed, using X-rays, a brush technique different from that of Vincent.
The fake Wackers were not even painted on French canvases: a decisive material clue.
The numbers F (de la Faille) and JH (Hulsker) allow each work to be cross-referenced with the complete known work.
Galleries of works at the heart of the debates
Three cases to understand
| Cas | Date | Issue |
|---|---|---|
| Otto Wacker case | 1928 - 1932 | ~33 paintings recognized as false; conviction, material evidence (pigments, resin, X-rays, canvas). |
| Sunset at Montmajour | 1888 /2013 | Authenticated by the Van Gogh Museum using a letter and pigments. |
| Sunflowers (Tokyo version) | 1888 /1987 | Record at $39.9 million; suspicion of copying; majority consensus in favor of authenticity. |
Related articles on Van Gogh
Why does Van Gogh sign Vincent?
Signatures, unsigned works and pronunciation.
Read ArticleVan Gogh, Delacroix and Rembrandt
The masters he looked at at the museum.
Read ArticleVan Gogh's touch
Direction, rhythm and impasto under the magnifying glass.
Read ArticleVan Gogh after Millet
Copy to translate into colors.
Read ArticleExplore the Van Goghs
Van Gogh self-portrait
Self-portraits from all periods.
See the collectionSuns, sunsets and sunrises by Van Gogh
Suns, sunsets and sunrises, including Montmajour.
See the collectionVan Gogh and Japan
Japanese prints and Japonism by Vincent.
See the collectionVan Gogh's wheat fields
Sowers, harvests, sheaves: working the land.
See the collectionVan Gogh Mills
Moulins de Montmartre and surrounding areas.
See the collectionPortrait Van Gogh
Portraits, Arlesians, figures of the entourage.
See the collectionVan Gogh in Arles
Sunflowers, Room, coffee at night, orchards from 1888.
See the collectionVan Gogh in Saint-Rémy-de-Provence
Starry night, cypresses, olive trees, irises from 1889.
See the collectionVan Gogh in Paris
Montmartre, Asnières, Parisian experiments.
See the collectionVan Gogh in Auvers-sur-Oise
Church, fields, crows of the last months.
See the collectionTrue or false Van Gogh?
How do you authenticate a Van Gogh?
By the convergence of several clues: provenance, letters from the painter, analysis of pigments, x-ray, study of the canvas and cross-checking with the catalog raisonné (numbers F and JH).
What's Wacker case?
In 1928, the Berlin merchant Otto Wacker sold around thirty fake Van Goghs, certified by great experts. Material analyzes (pigments, resin, X-rays, non-French canvas) proved the deception. Wacker was convicted in 1932.
Can an unsigned painting be authentic?
Yes. Sunset at Montmajour, which is unsigned, was authenticated in 2013 by the Van Gogh Museum through a letter from Vincent and pigment analysis.
Are Tokyo Sunflowers authentic?
The majority of experts and the Van Gogh Museum consider them authentic, although controversy has raised a possible copy of Schuffenecker. The canvas was also enlarged by strips added afterwards.
Why is Van Gogh copied so much?
Its very recognizable touch, its record rating and the large number of works (around 900 paintings) make forgeries tempting and sometimes difficult to detect without scientific analyses.
What are F and JH numbers?
These are the catalog raisonné numbers: F for Jacob Baart de la Faille (1928, revised 1970), JH for Jan Hulsker (1977, revised 1996). They make it possible to identify and cross-check each work.
Does the Van Gogh Museum have the last word?
His opinions are a reference, but authentication remains a collective debate. Canvases that have been discarded for a long time can be re-evaluated, such as Sunset at Montmajour was after two years of investigation.
Four signs that should alert you
The Wacker affair taught experts to be wary of the obvious. Here are the clues that, even today, lean towards doubt rather than authenticity.
A perfect story but without a documentary trace arouses distrust - like Wacker's famous "anonymous Russian collector".
An industrial color invented after the painter's death immediately betrays counterfeiting.
Applied with a uniform line over an aged painting, it contrasts with the irregularity of Vincent's real signatures.
For the period 1886 -1890, a support not found in France constitutes a decisive material index.
Reminder: none of these signs alone is sufficient. It is their accumulation that carries conviction - as in a trial.
A century of authentications
The history of Van Gogh authentication is a long series of twists and turns. Three emblematic cases show how the scientific method has gradually replaced the sole eye of the expert.
Around thirty paintings certified authentic by de la Faille and eminent critics. Unmasked by the analysis of pigments, an accelerating resin, X-rays and non-French canvases. Wacker was convicted in 1932.
De la Faille publishes The fake Van Goghs, which lists 174 paintings held for counterfeits. The work establishes the modern discipline of scientific expertise.
An unsigned canvas, forgotten for a century in the attic of a Norwegian collector, is authenticated by the Van Gogh Museum thanks to pigment analysis and a letter from Vincent dated July 5, 1888.
The version purchased at a record price in 1987 aroused a suspicion of copying by Schuffenecker. The majority consensus nevertheless maintains it as authentic.
The lesson is constant: no signature, no eye, even reputable, is enough. It is the convergence of proofs - provenance, letters, materials, X-rays, catalog - which carries conviction.
"Expertise is fallible; matter, rarely."Principle inherited from the Wacker affair
Go to texts
- Van Gogh Museum, Amsterdam - collection.
- The Letters of Vincent van Gogh - Van Gogh Museum scholarly edition /Huygens ING.
- Wikipedia (en) - Otto Wacker, Van Gogh forgeries case of 1928.
- Wikipedia (en) - Jacob Baart de la Faille, catalog raisonné and "The false Van Goghs" (1930).
- Wikipedia (en) - Jan Hulsker, chronological catalog raisonné (JH).
- Wikipedia (en) - Sunset at Montmajour, 2013 authentication.
- Wikipedia (en) - Sunflowers (Van Gogh series), debate on Tokyo's version.
- Van Gogh Museum, Amsterdam, searches and authentications.
- The Letters of Vincent van Gogh, Van Gogh Museum edition /Huygens ING (letter to Théo dated July 5, 1888).
- Wikimedia Commons - Sunset at Montmajour, public domain.
- Wikimedia Commons - Vase with Fifteen Sunflowers (JH 1562), public domain.
Vincent van Gogh's works are in the public domain. Reproductions come from Wikimedia Commons (public domain). The facts (Wacker affair, 2013 authentication, Sunflower debate) are based on the Wikipedia articles cited and on the Van Gogh Museum letter edition.
0 comments