Han van Meegeren

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Han van Meegeren (10 October 1889 in Deventer in the Netherlands province of Overijssel – 30 December 1947 in Amsterdam), born Henricus Antonius van Meegeren, was a Dutch painter, art-restorer, and art forger. He is considered to be one of the most ingenious art forgers of the 20th century, duping buyers out of an estimated $25 to $30 million dollars. Van Meegeren's life was linked to that of the great Dutch painter Johannes Vermeer, who died in 1675. Vermeer had not been particularly well-known until the beginning of the twentieth century, and only about 35 of his works have survived.

Awakened early in his desire to be a painter by his teacher, Bartus Korteling, van Meegeren developed an enthusiasm for the marvelous colors used by painters during the Dutch Golden Age.

Unfortunately, his father did not share his son’s love of art, and instead, encouraged Han to study architecture, and sent him to the Hogeschool in Delft to receive training. Han soon broke from this forced study and began an increasingly successful career as a painter. At this time, he studied contemporary art, but quickly bored of it and was again drawn to the decadent colors and perspectives of some of the Dutch Golden Age paintings. During this time, however, painters from the Hague School, with which Vincent van Gogh was associated early in his career, were highly regarded and in much demand in the Netherlands. Art critics decried van Meegeren’s work, as tired and derivative, and as a result galleries and museums would not purchase his pictures.

Upon hearing these criticisms, van Meegeren became defensive and lambasted the art critics in an aggressive article in his magazine De Kemphaan. To van Meegeren the well-meaning art critics had attacked him and had destroyed his career. Thereupon, he decided to forge paintings and pictures by famous artists. He set out to replicate the styles and colors of the artists he copied perfectly, so that they could not be detected using authentication methods of the time. van Meegeren spent six years researching techniques, finally producing perfect forgeries of paintings of Frans Hals, Pieter de Hooch, Gerard ter Borch and Johannes Vermeer, which even the best art critics and experts of the time regarded as genuine, and sometimes exquisite, paintings.

During World War II, van Meegeren experienced the high point of his life. Finally his pictures hung in museums and his masterpieces were celebrated throughout the world. Sales of van Meegeren’s forgeries were facilitated by the occupation of the Netherlands by Germany. Wealthy Dutchmen, wanting to prevent a sellout of Dutch art to Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party, avidly bought the forgeries. Nevertheless a falsified "Vermeer" painted by Han van Meegeren ended up in the possession of Hermann Goering.

Following the end of World War II, the Allied Forces discovered the "Vermeer" that van Meegeren had sold to Hermann Goering. Han van Meegeren was arrested as a German Collaborator, as the officials believed that he had sold Dutch cultural property to the Nazis. These crimes threatened the death penalty; and so van Meegeren fearfully confessed to the forgery, and sought to exonerate himself by painting another “Vermeer” from his jail cell.

Detailed investigations of this new forgery, by international consultants, confirmed that the Goering painting could not have originated from the Dutch Golden Age and was, in fact, a forgery. Han van Meegeren, no longer despised as a German Collaborator, was celebrated by the Dutch public as a clever crook, who had succeeded in fooling both the art experts, and the hated Hermann Goering. with his forgeries.

The Amsterdam regional court convicted Han van Meegeren on charges of falsification and fraud, and sentenced him to the legal minimum punishment of one year prison. Van Meegeren never served his sentence. On 26 November 1947, the last day to appeal the courts ruling, van Meegeren suffered a heart attack and was sent to the Valeriuskliniek hospital in Amsterdam, where he died on 30 December 1947.

Contents 1 Artistic development 2 Emergence of the forgeries 2.1 Inventing the "perfect forgery" 2.2 The Forger fools Hermann Goering 3 The confession 3.1 The trial; the commission of experts 3.2 Sentence, illness and death 4 The Aftermath 4.1 Auction of van Meegeren’s estate 4.2 Jacque van Meegeren’s claim 4.3 M. Jean Decoen's objection 4.4 The Carnegie Mellon examination 5 Han van Meegeren’s legacy 6 Works 6.1 Retrospective exhibitions in museums 7 External links 7.1 Paintings with van Meegeren’s own signature 7.2 Forged Paintings 7.3 Photographs: Han van Meegeren 8 References 8.1 Scientific analysis references 8.2 References for works 8.3 Exhibition catalogues 9 Further reading 9.1 Han van Meegeren biographies 9.2 Novels about or inspired by Han van Meegeren 9.3 Films about or inspired by Han van Meegeren 10 Notes

[edit] Artistic development

Han (a diminutive version of Henri or Henricus) van Meegeren was born the third child of Roman-Catholic parents in the town of Deventer. He was the son of Augusta Louisa Henrietta Camps and Hendrikus Johannes van Meegeren, an English and history teacher at the Lehrerbildungsanstalt in the city of Deventer.

Early on, Han felt neglected and misunderstood by his father, as the elder van Meegeren strictly forbade Han’s artistic development, and constantly derided him-“You do not know anything, you are nothing and you can nothing” (Doudart de la Grée, 1946a:134 – 161; Godley, 1951:127 - 129).

By the age of eight or nine Han had turned against his fathers wishes and began to draw. On a visit to the Hogere Burger School, he met teacher and painter Bartus Korteling (1853 - 1930), who would become his mentor. Korteling had been greatly inspired by Johannes Vermeer and showed the young van Meegeren how Vermeer had manufactured and mixed his colors. Korteling had rejected the Impressionist Movement, as decadent, degenerate art, and his strong personal influence probably later led van Meegeren to rebuff contemporary styles, and to paint exclusively in the style of the Dutch Golden Age (Godley, 1951:129 - 134).

In 1907 van Meegeren, compelled by his fathers demands, left home to study architecture at The Hague University in Delft, the hometown of the Johannes Vermeer. In addition to his architectural studies, van Meegeren would often visit the art school. During his studies van Meegeren was able to complete most of the preliminary examinations, but was twice unable to pass the Staatsexamen (final) examination; and in 1913 he gave up his architecture studies and concentrated on drawing and painting at the art school.

On 18 April 1912 van Meegeren married fellow art student, Anna de Voogt, from Rijswijk against his father’s wishes. After the marriage ceremony, the couple left Delft, and went to live with Anna’s grandmother in Rijswijk. Their son Jacques Henri Emil was born on 26 August 1912 in Rijswijk. Jacques later became a painter; he died on 26 October 1977 in Amsterdam.

On 8 January 1913 Han van Meegeren received the prestigious Hague Gold Medal from The Hague University, for his Study of the Interior of the Church of Saint Lawrence (Laurenskerk) in Rotterdam (illustration found in (Goll, 1962) and (Schueller,1953). The award is given every five years to an art student that creates the best work, and is accompanied by a gold medal. However, van Meegeren was financially broke and had to sell the study for a pittance.

In the summer 1914 van Meegeren moved his family to Scheveningen. He completed the diploma examination at that Hague Academy of Arts, and received his diploma, in drawing, on 4 August 1914. The diploma would allow him to teach, and soon after he was offered a position as a Professor at the Academy of Arts. However, wishing to remain an independent artist, van Meegeren rejected the offer.

Instead van Meegeren left Delft and took a position as an Assistant Professor of Drawing and Art History in Gips, for the small monthly salary of 75 guldens. In March 1915 his daughter Pauline (later called Inez) was born. To supplement his income, Han would sketch posters and paint small pictures (generally Christmas cards, still-life, landscapes, and Portraits) for the art trade.

Van Meegeren showed his first paintings publicly in Delft, where they were exhibited from April to May 1917 at the Kunstzaal Pictura in The Hague. In December 1919 he was accepted as a select member to the Haagse Kunstkring, an exclusive society of writers and painters, who met weekly in the Ridderzaal (or “knight’s hall” see: Binnenhof).

From his view of the royal palace gardens, adjacent to his studio at The Hague, van Meegeren would often paint the tame Roe Deer, belonging to Princess Juliana. He made many sketches and drawings of the deer and in 1921 painted a picture “Hertje” (“The fawn”), which became quite popular in the Netherlands.

By all accounts promiscuity and alcohol abuse (Godley, 1951:143 - 147, Bailey 2002: 253) were responsible for the break up of van Meegeren’s marriage to Anna de Voogt, and they were divorced on 19 July 1923. She left with the children and moved to Paris, where from time to time, van Meegeren would visit his children. Following his divorce, the quality of van Meegeren’s work declined dramatically. Although he had not passed the portrait-painting section of his diploma examination in 1914, he now dedicated himself to portraiture, as it served to earn him the most money (Godley, 1951:142 - 145).

Han van Meegeren undertook numerous journeys to Belgium, France, Italy and England, and acquired a name for himself as a talented portraitist. He earned stately fees through commissions by the English and American society-circles, which spent their winter vacations on the Côte d'Azur. His clients were impressed by his understanding of the 17th century techniques of the Dutch masters. Throughout his life van Meegeren would paint pictures to which he would sign his own signature. His own signature differed greatly from the marks he used on his forgeries (Schueller, 1953).

On 12 November 1928 he was married, in Woerden, to the actress Johanna Theresia Oerlemans (also known as Jo van Walraven and Jo Oerlemans), with whom he had been living for the past three years. She had previously been married to art critic and journalist, Dr. C H. de Boer (Karel de Boer), and Jo brought their daughter, Viola, into the van Meegeren household.

[edit] Emergence of the forgeries

In the Netherlands Han van Meegeren had become a well-known and wealthy painter. Hertje (1921) and Straatzangers (1928) were particularly popular, and until 1927 he had received mostly praise for his works from the art critics.

By 1928, the similarity of van Meegeren’s paintings of those of the old masters began to draw the reproach of Dutch art critics, which were, at that time, more interested in the Cubist and Surrealist Movements. It was said that van Meegeren’s only talent was imitation and that, outside of copying other artist’s work, his talent was limited (Godley, 1951). In response to these comments he published a series of aggressive articles in the monthly magazine De Kemphaan (“The Combat Cock”). Between April 1928 - March 1930, and together with painter, Theo van Wijngaarden, and journalist, January Ubink, van Meegeren raged against the art community, and in the process lost any sympathy with the critics.

Van Meegeren felt that his genius had been misjudged, and set out prove to the art critics that he could not only copy the style of the Dutch masters in his paintings, but that he could produce artwork so magnificent that it would rival the works of master painters. Preparations for his forgeries took him six years (1932 - 1937). In the end, he forged works by Frans Hals, Pieter de Hooch, Gerard ter Borch and Johannes Vermeer, that even the critics and art experts could not distinguish from the originals.

[edit] Inventing the "perfect forgery"

Van Meegeren delved into the biographies of the old masters, studying their lives, their occupations, their trademark techniques and their catalogues. In October of 1932 Dr. Abraham Bredius published an article about a recently discovered Vermeer which he described as a painting of a Man and Woman at a Spinet (Bredius, October 1932:145). The painting was later sold to Amsterdam banker, Dr. Fritz Mannheimer. It is thought that this painting was the first of Han van Meegeren’s Vermeer forgeries.

In October 1932 van Meegeren moved to the village of Roquebrune-Cap-Martin with his wife. There he rented the furnished mansion “Primavera”. In Roquebrune he set out to define the chemical and technical procedures which would be necessary to create his perfect forgeries. Van Meegeren found a 17th-century canvas to paint on, and mixed his own paints from raw materials (such as 140 gram lapis lazuli, white lead, indigo, and cinnabar) using old formulas to ensure that they were authentic. In addition he made genuine hair paintbrushes, similar to those Vermeer was known to have used. He came up with a scheme of using phenol and formaldehyde to cause the paints to harden after application, making the paintings appear as if they were centuries old. After completing a painting, he would bake it to dry it out completely, roll it over a drum to crackle it a bit, and later wash it in black (India) ink to fill in the cracks (Godley, 1951:43-56, 86-90).

It took Van Meegeren several years to work out his techniques, and when he was done he was pleased with his work, on both an artistic and deceptive level. His first two forgeries, using the falsification technology he had developed, were two “Vermeers”: Lady Reading Music after Vermeer’s Woman in Blue Reading a Letter in the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam, and Lady Playing Music after Vermeer’s Woman with a Lute near a window at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York City. Van Meegeren did not sell these paintings, as he felt that they were too recognizable as forgeries.

Following a journey to the 1936 Summer Olympics in Berlin, van Meegeren painted The Disciples at Emmaus, using the ultramarine blues and yellows preferred by Johannes Vermeer and other Dutch Golden Age painters. After learning that the experts assumed Vermeer had studied in Italy, van Meergeren used The Supper at Emmaus by Michelangelo Merisi da Caravaggio, located at Italy’s Pinacoteca di Brera, as model for his work. He had always wanted to walk in the steps of the masters, and he felt that his forgery, The Disciples at Emmaus, was a fine work in its own right. Van Meegeren gave the forgery to his friend, the attorney C. A. Boon, telling him it was a genuine Vermeer, and persuaded him to pass the painting on to potential buyers as authentic (Schueller, 1953:26).

Famous art connoisseur and Vermeer expert, Dr. Abraham Bredius, examined the forgery in September 1937 (Bredius, 1937:210-211), and despite some doubts whether it was a genuine Vermeer, the painting was purchased by shipowner Daniel George Van Beuningen for 550,000 guilders ($300,000 or about $4M today^[1]). In 1938, the piece was highlighted in a special exhibition at the Rotterdam museum along with 450 Dutch masterpieces dating from 1400-1800. In the "Magazine for [the] History of Art", A. Feulner wrote that: “In the rather isolated area, in which the Vermeer picture hung, it was as quiet as in a chapel. The feeling of the consecration overflows on the visitors, although the picture has no ties to ritual or church” (Schueller, 1953: 28). The emotional effect of the picture as religious experience was so profound that many art critics no longer questioned the authenticity of the piece.

In the summer of 1938 Han van Meegeren moved to Nice. Using the proceeds from the sale of The Disciples at Emmaus he bought a 12 bedroom estate at Les Arènes de Cimiez. On the walls of the estate hung two of van Meegeren’s best forgeries, Interior with Cardplayers and Interior with Drinkers, both displaying the signature of Pieter de Hooch.

During his time in Nice, van Meegeren painted The Last Supper I, in the style of Vermeer. (The painting was later recovered in September 1949, during a search of the estate of Dr. Paul Coremans; x-ray examinations revealed that van Meegeren had reused the canvas of a painting by Govert Flinck.)

As the Second World War threatened, Han van Meegeren returned to the Netherlands, on 29 July 1939. He remained at a hotel in Amsterdam for five months and in 1940 moved to the city of Laren. Throughout November and December of 1941 van Meegeren issued his designs, which he would publish in 1942 as Han van Meegeren: Catalogue I. During this time van Meegeren created several forgeries, including The Head of Christ, The Last Supper II, The Blessing of Jacob, and The Washing of the Feet, all in the manner of Vermeer. On 18 December 1943 he separated from his second wife, Jo Oerlemans.

In November 1944, van Meegeren moved to Amsterdam, where he took up residence in the exclusive Keizersgracht 321. His forgeries had earned him between 5.5 to 7.5 million guilders ($2-$3M, or about $23-30 Million today^[1]. He used this money to purchase a large amount of real estate, as well as works of art, and to further his luxurious life-style. In a 1946 interview, he told Marie Louise Doudart de la Grée that he had owned 52 houses and 15 country houses around Laren, among them Grachtenhaeuser, a protected monument (Godley, 1951:43); and in Amsterdam, he had operated several nightclubs. (Schueller, 1953:39; Godley, 1951:215).

[edit] The Forger fools Hermann Goering

Under the German occupation of the Netherlands, van Meegeren's last sale of a Vermeer forgery, Christ with the Adulteress, was to banker and art dealer Alois Niedl in 1942. Niedl later sold it to Reichsmarshall Hermann Goering for 1.65 million guilders ($625,000 or $7 Million today ^[1]). Göring wasn't too concerned about the money, however, since he paid in counterfeit currency. Experts would have easily identified it as a forgery, as van Meegeren had used cobalt blue, a color invented well after Vermeer’s death (Bailey 2002:255).

Hermann Goering showcased the Vermeer forgery at his residence in Carinhall (about 65 kilometers north of Berlin). On 25 August 1943 Hermann Goering hid Christ with the Adulteress in an Austrian salt mine, along with the rest of his collection of looted artwork. On 17 May 1945, the allied forces entered the salt mine, where Captain Harry Anderson discovered the previously unknown "Vermeer".

[edit] The confession

In May of 1945, the allied forces questioned banker and art dealer, Alois Niedl, regarding the newly discovered Vermeer. Niedl confessed that he had purchased the Vermeer from Han van Meegeren. On 29 May 1945 van Meegeren was arrested and charged with fraud and aiding and abetting the enemy. He was remanded to Weteringschans prison.

As an alleged Nazi collaborator and plunderer of Dutch cultural property, the authorities threatened van Meegeren with extensive prison time or the death penalty. Faced with these bleak choices, and after spending two weeks in jail, he confessed to forging the Vermeers. On 12 June 1945 he exclaimed: “The painting in Goering’s hands is not, as you assume, a Vermeer van Delft, but a van Meegeren! I painted the picture!” (Schueller, 1953:16).

Several experts were wary of van Meegeren’s tale of the "Vermeer", so between July and September, 1945, in the presence of 6 witnesses; a Vermeer expert, a photographer and four police officers, van Meegeren painted his last forgery, Jesus among the Doctors.

[edit] The trial; the commission of experts

The trial of Han van Meegeren began on 29 October 1947 in Room 4 of the Regional Court in Amsterdam (Doudart de la Grée, 1946a:176–217 and Godley, 1951:268-281). The collaboration charges had been dropped, since the expert panel had found that the "Vermeer" sold to Hermann Goering by Han van Meegeren had been a forgery and was, therefore, not the cultural property of the Netherlands. The public prosecutor, H. A. Wassenbergh, brought charges of forgery and fraud against Han van Meegeren, and demanded that the defendant serve two years prison for his crimes.

The court commissioned an international group of experts to address the authenticity of van Meegeren's paintings. The commission included curators, professors and doctors from the Netherlands, Belgium and England and was led by the director of the Belgian Museum’s Chemical Laboratory, Dr. Paul Coremans (Coremans, 1949 and Schueller, 1953: 18-19). Over a two year period, the commission examined the Vermeer and Frans Hals paintings which Han van Meegeren had designated as forgeries.

With the help of the commission, Dr. Coremans was able to determine the chemical composition of Han van Meegeren’s paints. He found that van Meegeren had prepared the paints by mixing modern white lead with the plastic bonding agent, Albertol (also sold under the name Ampertol), a phenol formaldehyde resin (Bailey 2002:253). Both of these components were introduced and manufactured in the 20th century, proving that the “Vermeers” and “Frans Hals” examined by the commission were not painted in the 17th century by the Dutch masters, but were in fact recent endeavors (Roth, 1971:81-85).

The test results obtained by the commission seemed to confirm that the works were forgeries. But the results of the commission’s tests continued to be debated by experts until 1967, when new investigative techniques were used to confirm that the paintings were indeed forgeries.

[edit] Sentence, illness and death

On 12 November 1947 the Fourth Chamber of the Amsterdam Regional Court found van Meegeren guilty of forgery and fraud, and sentenced him to a minimum sentence of one year in prison.

On 26 November 1947, the last day to appeal the ruling, van Meegeren suffered a heart attack and was rushed to the Valeriuskliniek hospital in Amsterdam (Godley, 1951:282). While at the hospital, van Meegeren suffered a second heart attack on 29 December, and was pronounced dead at 7:00 pm on 30 December 1947. His family and several hundred of his friends attended his funeral at the Driehuis Westerfeld Crematorium chapel. In 1948 his urn was buried in the Algemene Cemetery at Raalterweg 29 in the village of Diepenveen (municipality of Deventer). The urn will remain at the cemetery until at least 2008.

[edit] The Aftermath

[edit] Auction of van Meegeren’s estate

The court ruled that van Meegeren’s estate be auctioned and the proceeds from his property and the sale of his counterfeits be used to refund the buyers of his works, to pay income taxes on the sale of his paintings, and to pay for the services of the middlemen and dealers who had sold his works. In December of 1945 van Meegeren had filed for bankruptcy.

On 5 and 6 September 1950, van Meegeren’s Amsterdam house at Keizersgracht 321 was auctioned by order of the court, along with 738 pieces of furniture and works of art, including numerous paintings by old and new masters from the private collection of the van Meegerens.

The Amsterdam house was estimated to be worth 65,000 guilders, and the proceeds of the sale amounted to 123,000 guilders. Van Meegeren’s unsigned painting The Last Supper I was bought for 2,300 guilders, while the forgery Jesus among the Doctors (which van Meegeren had painted while in detention) sold for 3,000 guilders (about $800 or about $7,000 today^[1]). Today the painting hangs in a Johannesburg church. The sale of the van Meegeren’s entire estate amounted to 226,599 guilders ($60,000, or about 0.5 Million today^[1]).

[edit] Jacque van Meegeren’s claim

In January 1951 Han van Meegeren’s son announced to the Paris press that his father had forged four additional paintings:

• Frans Hals' Boy holding a Flute (1626-28), in the Frans Hals Museum in Haarlem (now at the Staatliches Museum, Schwerin).
• A counterpart to the famous Frans Hals painting The Laughing Cavalier (1626), owned by Cornelis Hofstede de Groot (now part of the Groninger Museum collection).
• The Girl with the Blue Hat, in the collection of the Museo Thyssen-Bornemisza.
• A counterpart to Vermeer’s Girl with a Pearl Earring which hangs in the Mauritshuis in The Hague.

However, when Jacque van Meegeren could not provide any documents, sketches or witnesses to prove that the paintings were forgeries, the authorities lost interest in his statements (Schueller, 1953:46-48).

[edit] M. Jean Decoen's objection

M. Jean Decoen, a Brussels art expert and restorer, stated in his 1951 book that he believed two of van Meegeren's paintings, The Disciples at Emmaus and The Last Supper II, to be genuine Vermeers, and that it was after these two models that Han van Meegeren had falsified his Vermeers. Decoen went on to state that conclusions of Dr. Paul Coreman’s panel of experts were wrong and that the paintings should again be examined (Decoen, 1950; Schueller, 1953:48-58).

The buyer of The Last Supper II, Interior with Drinkers, and The Head of Christ, ship-owner Daniel George van Beuningen, demanded that Dr. Paul Coremans publicly admit that he had erred in his analysis of van Meegeren’s paintings. When Coremans refused, van Beuningen sued him, alleging that Coremans’ wrongful branding of The Last Supper II diminished the value of his “Vermeer” and asking for compensation of £500,000 (about $1.3 Million or about $10 Million today^[1]). The trial was set for 2 June 1955, but was delayed owing to van Beuningen's death on 29 May 1955. Approximately seven months later, the court heard the case on behalf of van Beuningen's heirs. The court found in favor of Coremans, and the findings of his commission were upheld (Godley, 1951:256-258).

[edit] The Carnegie Mellon examination

In 1967, the Artists Material Center at Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh examined several of the “Vermeers” in their collection. Under the direction of Dr. Robert Feller and Dr. Bernard Keisch, the examination confirmed that several of their paintings were, in fact, created using materials invented in the 20th century. They concluded that the “Vermeers” in their possession were, in reality, van Meegeren forgeries. In the process of their examinations Feller and Keisch also confirmed the findings of the 1946 Coremans commission, and refuted the claims made by M. Jean Decoen (Keisch, 1967). The test results, obtained by the Carnegie Mellon team are summarized below.

Han van Meegeren knew that white lead was used during Vermeer’s time, but of course van Meegeren had to obtain his stocks through the modern color trade, which had changed significantly since the 17th centrury. During Vermeer’s time, Dutch lead was mined from deposits located in the Low Countries; however, by the 19th century most lead was imported from the rich ores of Australia and the Americas. Thus, modern white lead differs greatly from the white lead Vermeer would have used, both in the isotope composition of the lead and in the content of trace elements found in the ores. Dutch white lead was extracted from ores containing high levels of trace elements of silver and antimony (R. Strauss, 1968). On the other hand, the modern white lead used by Han van Meegeren contained neither silver nor antimony, as those elements are now separated from the lead during the modern smelting process (Falsification and Research).

Forgeries in which modern lead or white lead pigment has been used can be recognized by using a technique called Pb(Lead)-210-Dating (Keisch, 1968). Pb-210 is a naturally occurring radioactive element that is part of the Uranium-238 Radioactive decay series, and has a half life of 22.3 years. To determine the amount of Pb-210, the alpha radiation emitted by another element, Polonium-210 (Po-210), is measured (Flett, 2003). Thus it is possible to estimate the age of a painting, within a few years' span, by extrapolating the Pb-210 content present in the paint used to create the painting (Falsification and Research and Froentjes, 1977).

The white lead in the painting The Disciples at Emmaus had Polonium-210 values of 8.5 +/- 1.4 and Radium-226 (part of the Uranium-238 Radioactive decay series) values of 0.8 +/- 0.3. In contrast, the white lead found in Dutch paintings from 1600-1660 had Polonium-210 values of 0.23 +/-0.27 and Radium-226 values of 0.40+/- 0.47.

[edit] Han van Meegeren’s legacy

A Dutch opinion poll conducted in October of 1947 placed Han van Meegeren’s popularity second in the nation, behind only the Prime Minister's. The Dutch people viewed van Meegeren as a cunning trickster, who successfully fooled the Dutch art experts, and more importantly fooled Hermann Goering himself.

It is difficult to describe accurately the life of Han van Meegeren because, by definition, he led a conspiratorial life. Van Meegeren played many different roles, many of which were shrouded in fraudulent intentions. He deceived and disappointed those around him in order to fulfill his goal of besting his critics. In the event, Han’s father may have foreseen his path, as his father once told him: “You are a cheat and always will be” (Doudart de la Grée, 1946a:145, 230).

Han van Meegeren remains one of the most ingenious art counterfeiters of the 20th century. After his trial, however, he declared: “My triumph as a counterfeiter was my defeat as [a] creative artist” (Doudart de la Grée, 1946a:224).

In recent years, market prices for Han van Meegeren's forgeries have increased dramatically. So, in an amusing turn of events, not only have some “Vermeers” been forged by Han van Meegeren, some “van Meegerens” have actually been forged by a new generation of forgers.

[edit] Works

List of Han van Meegeren’s forgeries (Brandhof, 1979) and (de Boer, 1942):

Note: For paintings with links- clicking the white arrow, just to the left of the text, will show a large version of the painting.

• Man and Woman at a Spinet 1932 (sells to Amsterdam banker, Dr. Fritz Mannheimer)
• Lady Reading Music 1935 - 1936 (unsold, on display at the Rijksmuseum.)
• Lady Playing Music 1935 - 1936 (unsold, on display at the Rijksmuseum.)
• Portrait of a Man 1935 - 1936 (unsold, on display at the Rijksmuseum.)
• Woman Drinking 1935 - 1936 (unsold, on display at the Rijksmuseum.)
• The Disciples at Emmaus, 1936 - 1937 (sells to the Boymans for 520,000 - 550,000 guldens, about $300,000 or $4 Million today)
• Interior with Drinkers 1937 - 1938 (sells to D G. van Beuningen for 219,000 - 220,000 guldens about $120,000 or $1.6 Million today)
• The Last Supper I, 1938 - 1939
• Interior with Cardplayers 1938 - 1939 (sells to W. van der Vorm for 219,000 - 220,000 guldens $120,000 or $1.6 Million today)
• The Head of Christ, 1940 - 1941 (sells to D G. van Beuningen for 400,000 - 475,000 guldens about $225,000 or $3.25 Million today)
• The Last Supper II, 1940 - 1942 (sells to D G. van Beuningen for 1,600,000 guldens about $600,000 or $7 Million today)
• The Blessing of Jacob 1941 - 1942 (sells to W. van der Vorm for 1,270,000 guldens about $500,000 or $5.75 Million today)
• Christ with the Adulteress 1941 - 1942 (sells to Hermann Goering for 1,650,000 guldens about $624,000 or $6.75 Million today)
• The Washing of the Feet 1941 - 1943 (sells to the Netherlands state for 1,250,000 – 1,300,000 guldens about $500,000 or $5.3 Million today, on display at the Rijksmuseum.)
• Jesus among the Doctors- September 1945 (sells at auction for 3,000 guldens, about $800 or $7,000 today)

[edit] Retrospective exhibitions in museums

Posthumously, Han van Meegeren forgeries have been shown in exhibitions around the world, including exhibitions in Amsterdam (1952), Basel (1953), Zurich (1953), Haarlem in the Kunsthandlung de Boer (1958), London (1961), Rotterdam (1971), Minneapolis (1973), Essen (1976-1977), Berlin (1977), Slot Zeist (1985), New York (1987), Berkeley, CA (1990), Munich (1991), Rotterdam (1996), The Hague (1996) and more recently at the Haagse Kunstkring, The Hague (2004) and Stockholm (2004), and have thus been made broadly accessible to the public (Schmidt, 1953; Mondadori, 1991, and van Wijnen, 1996).

[edit] External links

[edit] Paintings with van Meegeren’s own signature

• Paintings with Han van Meegeren own signature
• Gallery Van Waning: Index
• Glorification of Labor, Juvenile Hall, Connecticut

[edit] Forged Paintings

• Catalogue of Han van Meegeren Forgeries
• Site dedicated to Han van Meegeren which shows and discusses most of his forgeries.
• Bilder im Rijksmuseum Amsterdam (nl.)Pictures in the Rijksmuseum Amsterdam (nl.) The pictures can be increased: first on the picture and then on the arrow press.

[edit] Photographs: Han van Meegeren

• Photo from van Meegeren’s trial
• The 1949 discovery of The Last Supper I.
• Han van Meegeren’s grave

[edit] References

• Doudart de la Grée, Marie Louise (1946a). The phenomenon: Dramatised documentary concerning the living art painter Han van Meegeren. Amsterdam: Omniboek.
• Doudart de la Grée, Marie-Louise (1946b). Han Van Meegeren. Emmaus, Roman.
• Godley, John (Lord Kilbracken) (1951). Van Meegeren, master forger. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons. LC call number: ND653.M58 K53 1966.
• Goll, Joachim (1962). Art counterfeiter. Leipzig: E.A.Seemann Publishing House. Language: German (with pictures Number 106 – 122 and literature pp. 249 – 250).
• Schueller, Sepp (1953). Fake or genuine? The case of van Meegeren. Bonn. Language: German.
• Bailey, Anthony (2002). Vermeer. Berlin: Siedler Verlag. ISBN 3-88680-745-2.
• Van Meegeren, Han (partly under alias) (April 1928–March 1930). De Kemphaan.
• Bredius, Abraham (October 1932). "An unpublished Vermeer". Burlington Magazine 61:145.
• Bredius, Abraham (November 1937). "A new Vermeer". Burlington Magazine 71:210-211.
• Coremans, Paul B. (1949). Van Meegeren’s faked Vermeers and De Hooghs: a scientific examination. Amsterdam: J. M. Meulenhoff. ASIN: B0007J0TPU.
• Roth, Toni (1971). "Methods to determine identity and authenticity". The art and the beautiful home 83:81-85.
• Decoen, Jean (1950). Back to the truth, Vermeer-Van Meegeren :Two genuine Vermeers. Rotterdam: Editions Ad. Donker. Illustrations: b/w. ASIN: B0007J3DBC.

[edit] Scientific analysis references

• R. Strauss (1968). "Analysis of investigations of pigments from paintings of south German painters in the 17th and 18th century." (With 62 slides). Thesis. Technical University Munich.
• Falsification and Research (1976) "Museum Folkwang, Essen and Staatliche Museen Preußischer Kulturbesitz, Berlin". Berlin. Language: German. ISBN 3-7759-0201-5.
• Keisch, Bernard, Robert L. Feller, A. S. Levine and R. R. Edwards (1967). "Dating and authenticating works of art by measurement of natural alpha radiation". Science 155 (3767):1238-1242.
• Keisch, Bernard (1968). "Dating works through their natural radioactivity: Improvements and applications". Science 160:413-415.
• Froentjes, W., and R. Breek (1977). "A new study into the identity of the [portfolio] of Van Meegeren". Chemical Magazine: 583-589.
• Flett, Dr. Robert (October 8, 2003). Understanding the Pb-210 Method.

[edit] References for works

• Marijke van Brandhof (1979). "Early Vermeer 1937. Contexts of life and work of the painter/falsifier Han van Meegeren". (Catalogue of Han van Meegeren work pp. 153-163, with numerous illustrations of the pictures with the signature H. van Meegeren.) Dissertation. Utrecht: The Spectrum.
• De Boer, H., and Pieter Koomen (1942). Photographs of the paintings of Han van Meegeren: Han van Meegeren (Teekeningen I). With a preface by Drs-Ing. (Dr-Ing. denotes German doctorate in engineering) E. A. van Genderen Stort. 'sGravenhage: Publishing House L. J. C. Boucher.

[edit] Exhibition catalogues

• Schmidt, Georg (ed.) (1953). "Wrong or genuine?" (Basel, Zurich). Basel Art Museum.
• Arnaldo Mondadori Arte (1991). "Genuinely wrong" (Villa Stuck, München). Fondation Cartier.
• Van Wijnen, H. (1996). "Exhibition catalog Rotterdam". Han van Meegeren. (With 30 black-and-white and 16 color pictures.) The Hague. Language: Dutch.

[edit] Further reading

[edit] Han van Meegeren biographies

• Wynne, Frank (2006). I was Vermeer: The legend of the forger who swindled the Nazis. London: Bloomsbury. ISBN 9-7807-4756-6809.
• Moisewitsch, Maurice (1961). The Van Meegeren mystery. London: A&C Black.
• Werness, Hope B., and Denis Dutton (1983). "Han van Meegeren fecit". The forger’s art: Forgery and the philosophy of art. Berkeley: University of California Press.
• Kreuger, Frederik H. (2004). The life and work of Han Van Meegeren, master-forger. (First published in Dutch as Han van Meegeren, master-forger. Includes 130 illustrations, some in color, many of them new.) ISBN 90–76988–53–6.
• Baesjou, Jan (1956). The Vermeer forgeries: The story of Han van Meegeren. G. Bles. ASIN: B0006DBZ1O
• Godley, John (Lord Kilbracken) (1967). Van Meegeren: A case history. London: Thomas Nelson and Sons, Ltd.

[edit] Novels about or inspired by Han van Meegeren

• Kreuger, Frederik H. (2005). The Deception. Novel and His Real Life. The Netherlands: Quantes Uitgeverij. ISBN 90-5959-031-7.

A novelization of the life of Han van Meegeren. Includes a short history of van Meegeren’s real life (including some recently discovered facts) at the end of the book.

• Gaddis, William, William H. Gass (Introduction) (1955). The Recognitions. Penguin Classics (1993-reprint). ISBN 3-442-44878-6.

Novel, in which the main character is inspired by Han van Meegeren.

[edit] Films about or inspired by Han van Meegeren

• Fritz Kirchhoff (director). (1949). Verführte Hände (literally: Enticed hands) [Film]. Germany: [1]

• Peter Greenaway. (1965). A Zed & Two Noughts [Film]. Germany: [2]

In this movie the actor Gerard Thoolen plays a surgeon and a painter named Van Meegeren, who is modeled after Han van Meegeren.

• Jan Botermans and Gustav Maguel (1951). Van Meegeren’s false Vermeers [Film]. (See Sepp Schueller, p. 57.)

[edit] Notes

1. ^ ^{a b c d e f} To obtain the relative value in U.S. currency for a given year the number of guilders was divided by the rate of exchange (guilders or pounds per dollar)for that year. The value in U.S. currency for a given year was then entered into the formula at What is the Relative Value? to obtain the relative value in currency in “today’s” money(Consumer Price Index for 2005)

This article was translated into English from the German Wikipedia article of the same name.