France. When we talk about the false arts, we think of genius counterfeiters such as Han Van Meegeren and his false vermeer, or Joseph Van der Veken, famous for his striking imitations of primitive Flemish. In the collective imagination, a successful false is a “beautiful” false, imitating to the style of the greatest masters. However, not all counterfeiters seek to imitate famous artists or reproduce exceptional works. Some favor less valued styles, playing on specific aesthetic codes to give their creations an appearance of authenticity.
It is in this category that the so -called Aragonese counterpart is part of which works imitate the painting of the 15th century in Aragon. Less spectacular, these works were however taken for originals and integrated into French public collections. Can we then speak of an underminated counterfeiter? Beyond the quality of execution, what defines a false? Is it a simple question of technique and resemblance, or above all a misleading intention?
The marriage of a princefrom the Musée des Augustins de Toulouse.
© Bernard Delorme / City of Toulouse
The creations of the Aragonese counterpart are found in French museum collections and on the art market. Among them, The marriage of a princepreserved at the Musée des Augustins in Toulouse, was initially considered as an Aragonese work of the 15th century. Exhibited at the Pau Museum of Fine Arts, during the event “The Aragonese Primitives XIV-15th centuries” in 1971, the work was deemed clumsy, relating to a “rural production”. The Lyon Museum of Fine Arts has two panels representing courty scenes attributable to the same counterfeiter. The Palois museum also retains two other panels: one representing a king and the other a bishop. Other works have recently passed on the market, such as a Religious scene Sold in 2021 in Autun, and two panels on sale in Marseille in 2023: Royal inauguration scene And Execution scene (See ill.).
A deliberately mediocre invoice
The same left -in -law characterizes all of these works, with figures with elongated proportions, naive faces and excessive decorations of golden stucco. The artist also used old wooden panels, thus simulating dismantled fragments of altarpieces. However, none of the known fragments makes it possible to reconstruct a coherent whole. Even more surprising, the artist was not content to copy existing works. His productions do not even seem to correspond to precise iconography. Most of these scenes are completely invented, thus giving an almost unlimited freedom of interpretation. For example, The marriage of a prince From Toulouse was a time considered as a representation of the wedding of Isabelle de Castille and Ferdinand II of Aragon!
Although the works of this counterfeiter can be perceived as second -rate creations, they derive their ingenuity from the imitation of an unstoppated production. The Aragonese painting of the 15th century has long been perceived as the poor parent of Hispanic painting, itself underestimated outside the peninsula. With its golden stucco imitating goldsmithery, its decorative excess and its late adoption of contemporary pictorial innovations, it suffered from comparison with more prestigious artistic schools, like that of Flanders. Deemed too “rustic”, Aragonese art has long conveyed a devaluing image – a bias from which the counterpart has been able to take advantage of. He was able to disseminate his works without awakening suspicion, experts often ignoring production deemed marginal. The genius of these fakes therefore does not reside in their aesthetic qualities, but in their ability to play with the expectations and perceptions of their time.
Royal inauguration scene put in Paris in September 2023.
© Philocale
A well -informed counterfeiter
Like many counterfeiters, the Aragonese counterfeiter had to be aware of the news of the history of art of his time. A letter, preserved in the folder of the Pau museum, indicates that the panels had been bought, by an individual, at the beginning of the 20th century. It is likely that their production is in this period, marked by a renewed interest in ancient art in Europe, as evidenced by numerous exhibitions carried out around 1900. Among these, is in particular the Franco-Spanish exhibition of Zaragosse in 1908, where many medieval Iberian and Aragonese paintings were presented. It is therefore reasonable to date the production of the counterfeiter between 1908 and 1929, date of purchase of the panels of Pau.
If the question of the chronology seems resolved, that of the identity of the counterfeiter remains complex. The counterfeiter is the one at the origin of the fraudulent work, however this is not always the one that is believed. He can be the one who commits the false-that is to say a work which presents itself as what it is not-like the one who alters the truth without to be that at the origin of the work concerned. So how do we know if the false people who interest us are the work of an artist-fauna or the consequence of a fraudulent sale by an unscrupulous merchant? In the absence of certainties, it is necessary to be caution. “There are many examples of works produced without the intention of originally deceiving”as Rafael Cornudella, professor at the Autonomous University of Barcelona and specialist in Iberian painting, points out. For the latter “This was notably the case, following the ancient art exhibition in Barcelona in 1902: many copies were carried out without intention to deceive anyone and were able to sell themselves later as originals like panels representing prophets copying those of the altarpiece of Saint-Etienne de Granollers by the Vergós, passed by the Hispanic Society of America, in New York”. Anyway, there is no doubt that these works do not date from the 15th century, but are very posterior.
Purchases first by individuals
The counterfeiter, whether an artist or merchant, seemed to be aware of the mediocre character of his works. It was probably for this reason that he sought to sell them to individuals rather than museum institutions. Thus, all the works identified in public collections were first in private hand before being given to museums. The marriage of a prince Enter the Augustinian Museum in Toulouse in 1968, then the Courtyard are offered at the Museum of Fine Arts in Lyon in 1972. In 1990, the King and the Bishop were given to the Museum of Fine Arts in Pau.
It was not until 1991, when writing the catalog of paintings from the Lyon museum, that the deception was highlighted. Consulted on this occasion, Maria Del Carmen Lacarra Ducay, then professor at the University of Zaragoza, wrote that it was for her ” Clear example of falsification by an unscrupulous painter, from the end of the 19th centurye century- Beginning of the XXe century “. In Toulouse, fraud was only discovered in 2010, during a catering and only in 2023 in Pau, when the panels were appraised as part of the Iberian Tables Census Program in French public collections (RETIB), led by the Louvre Museum in collaboration with the National Art History Institute (INHA).
It would not be surprising that, in the years to come, new works of this counterfeiter appear in French public collections, particularly in the light of future work in the Retib. As Ludmila Virassamynaïken, curator at the Museum of Fine Arts in Lyon recalls, “The works belonging to the public collections, whether false or not, receive the same treatment, that is to say that they require the same care in terms of conservation, study and publication on our part”. It therefore remains to continue to improve the work of cross -checking information between the different institutions.
