<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Art, Lies, and Spectral Cameras</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.hydramag.com/2010/07/25/art-lies-and-spectral-cameras/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.hydramag.com/2010/07/25/art-lies-and-spectral-cameras/</link>
	<description>Literary arts magazine dedicated to the wayward, ordinary, bizarre, everyday, and the impossible.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 19 Jan 2012 05:33:55 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Fred R. Kline</title>
		<link>http://www.hydramag.com/2010/07/25/art-lies-and-spectral-cameras/#comment-2935</link>
		<dc:creator>Fred R. Kline</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 Oct 2010 03:30:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thehydramag.com/?p=5858#comment-2935</guid>
		<description>Mr. Medina&#039;s comments are well presented, but unfortunately the identification on the photo is incorrect: it is Peter Paul Biro not Martin Kemp.  So we begin Mr. Medina&#039;s article, ironically, with a mistaken identity.

Inviting further comment, I have posted a Press Release which I issued on September 28, 2010.  I was technically unable to post comparative images of &quot;La Bella Principessa&quot; and the Mannheim drawing by Julius Schnorr von Carolsfeld but I will be pleased to do so if instructed. 
                        ~ ~

EVIDENCE DISCOVERED IN REAL “DA VINCI CODE” MYSTERY 
Probable Identity of “La Bella Principessa” Revealed

Santa Fe, NM—An alleged Leonardo da Vinci drawing in a private collection, “La Bella Principessa,” widely reputed to be worth $150 million and subject of worldwide publicity and a recent book, may actually be a work by the eminent 19th century German artist Julius Schnorr von Carolsfeld (1794-1872), circa 1820, one of the little-known Nazarene Brotherhood of German painters working in Rome who copied the styles and subjects of Italian Renaissance masters. 

Most experts in Leonardo’s drawings and many prominent art historians have rejected the “Principessa” as a Leonardo but the actual creator has been an unsolved mystery since first reported in The New York Times two years ago. No other artist has been suggested until now.  The real-life intrigue surrounding the problematic drawing’s identity, its authentication, and its immense value, could have evolved from The Da Vinci Code and the Sherlock Holmes mysteries.

The surprising discovery was announced by Fred R. Kline, President of Kline Art Research Associates, Santa Fe, NM.  Kline, an independent art historian known for many discoveries of lost art, found a directly related drawing by Schnorr, “Half-Nude Female,” hidden in the collection of the State Art Museum in Mannheim, Germany in August 2010. Kline’s past discoveries include four unsigned drawings and one unsigned painting by other “Nazarene” artists now in prominent museum collections, including The Thaw Collection at The Morgan Library in New York and Frances Lehman Loeb Art Center Museum at Vassar College.

Kline—who also claims a specialty in da Vinci’s drawings—believes that the Mannheim drawing depicts the identical young woman with related braided hair as found in the ‘Principessa,’ and he suggests that it is likely drawn on the identical vellum as well. According to Kline, vellum, or parchment, is a rare material for drawing, which Schnorr often used and Leonardo never used. Other comparable Nazarene artists are not known to have used vellum. Two other Schnorr drawings on vellum are at Mannheim.  The comparative testing of the two vellum materials may occur in New York federal court in the currently pending lawsuit, Marchig vs. Christie’s, brought by the original owner of the “Principessa” who is accusing Christie’s of negligent misattribution.  Christie’s had auctioned the drawing in 1998 as “German School, early 19th century” and realized a sale of $21,850. [Note added: The drawing was purchased at this auction by Kate Ganz, a knowledgeable and experienced New York dealer who specialized in old master drawings and her determination after ten years study was that it was early 19th century German School, supporting Christie&#039;s attribution. Ganz sold it in 2007 to Mr. Peter Silverman, a freelance dealer with no apparent credentials as a connoisseur, who began the case for Leonardo and has probably been the financial backer of its development.]     

“The ‘Principessa’ recreates the exact woman in the Mannheim drawing but an idealized version of her in the manner of a Renaissance engagement portrait—possibly a gift from Schnorr to a favorite model,” said Kline. “The real question has always been who-really-dunnit?  Leonardo is no longer a credible possibility, except on faith.” 

Leonardo scholar, Oxford Emeritus Professor Martin Kemp, principal author of a recent book, “La Bella Principessa: The Story of the New Masterpiece by Leonardo Da Vinci,” offers supportive forensic evidence in the book and his own opinion of the drawing’s authenticity.  No dissenting opinions were considered. “Problematic connoisseurship and problematic science all around,” said Kline.

Among those who reject the “Principessa” as a Leonardo is the world’s leading expert on Leonardo’s drawings, Carmen Bambach, Curator of Drawings at Metropolitan Museum of Art and currently Mellon Professor at the National Gallery in Washington; and Martin Clayton, Curator of the Royal Collection at Windsor Castle, the world’s largest collection of da Vinci drawings.  

“I have no vested interest here other than to question authoritative judgments in art history and a longstanding desire to keep Leonardo’s and other old masters’ work free of fakes, bogus science, and substandard connoisseurship,” said Kline. “In the case of ‘La Principessa,’ let’s just say it’s at best an issue of mistaken identity that calls for correction.’’  

###


Fred R. Kline &amp; Co .(Fred R. Kline Gallery &amp; Kline Art Research Associates) is owned and directed by Fred and Jann Kline, established in 1979 in Santa Fe, New Mexico. Areas of interest include 18th-20th century American and European Paintings, Drawings, and Sculpture; 19th and early 20th century American Regionalists; 15th-18th century European Old Master Paintings and Drawings; 16th-19th century Spanish Colonial Mexico; and Contemporary Masters.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mr. Medina&#8217;s comments are well presented, but unfortunately the identification on the photo is incorrect: it is Peter Paul Biro not Martin Kemp.  So we begin Mr. Medina&#8217;s article, ironically, with a mistaken identity.</p>
<p>Inviting further comment, I have posted a Press Release which I issued on September 28, 2010.  I was technically unable to post comparative images of &#8220;La Bella Principessa&#8221; and the Mannheim drawing by Julius Schnorr von Carolsfeld but I will be pleased to do so if instructed.<br />
                        ~ ~</p>
<p>EVIDENCE DISCOVERED IN REAL “DA VINCI CODE” MYSTERY<br />
Probable Identity of “La Bella Principessa” Revealed</p>
<p>Santa Fe, NM—An alleged Leonardo da Vinci drawing in a private collection, “La Bella Principessa,” widely reputed to be worth $150 million and subject of worldwide publicity and a recent book, may actually be a work by the eminent 19th century German artist Julius Schnorr von Carolsfeld (1794-1872), circa 1820, one of the little-known Nazarene Brotherhood of German painters working in Rome who copied the styles and subjects of Italian Renaissance masters. </p>
<p>Most experts in Leonardo’s drawings and many prominent art historians have rejected the “Principessa” as a Leonardo but the actual creator has been an unsolved mystery since first reported in The New York Times two years ago. No other artist has been suggested until now.  The real-life intrigue surrounding the problematic drawing’s identity, its authentication, and its immense value, could have evolved from The Da Vinci Code and the Sherlock Holmes mysteries.</p>
<p>The surprising discovery was announced by Fred R. Kline, President of Kline Art Research Associates, Santa Fe, NM.  Kline, an independent art historian known for many discoveries of lost art, found a directly related drawing by Schnorr, “Half-Nude Female,” hidden in the collection of the State Art Museum in Mannheim, Germany in August 2010. Kline’s past discoveries include four unsigned drawings and one unsigned painting by other “Nazarene” artists now in prominent museum collections, including The Thaw Collection at The Morgan Library in New York and Frances Lehman Loeb Art Center Museum at Vassar College.</p>
<p>Kline—who also claims a specialty in da Vinci’s drawings—believes that the Mannheim drawing depicts the identical young woman with related braided hair as found in the ‘Principessa,’ and he suggests that it is likely drawn on the identical vellum as well. According to Kline, vellum, or parchment, is a rare material for drawing, which Schnorr often used and Leonardo never used. Other comparable Nazarene artists are not known to have used vellum. Two other Schnorr drawings on vellum are at Mannheim.  The comparative testing of the two vellum materials may occur in New York federal court in the currently pending lawsuit, Marchig vs. Christie’s, brought by the original owner of the “Principessa” who is accusing Christie’s of negligent misattribution.  Christie’s had auctioned the drawing in 1998 as “German School, early 19th century” and realized a sale of $21,850. [Note added: The drawing was purchased at this auction by Kate Ganz, a knowledgeable and experienced New York dealer who specialized in old master drawings and her determination after ten years study was that it was early 19th century German School, supporting Christie's attribution. Ganz sold it in 2007 to Mr. Peter Silverman, a freelance dealer with no apparent credentials as a connoisseur, who began the case for Leonardo and has probably been the financial backer of its development.]     </p>
<p>“The ‘Principessa’ recreates the exact woman in the Mannheim drawing but an idealized version of her in the manner of a Renaissance engagement portrait—possibly a gift from Schnorr to a favorite model,” said Kline. “The real question has always been who-really-dunnit?  Leonardo is no longer a credible possibility, except on faith.” </p>
<p>Leonardo scholar, Oxford Emeritus Professor Martin Kemp, principal author of a recent book, “La Bella Principessa: The Story of the New Masterpiece by Leonardo Da Vinci,” offers supportive forensic evidence in the book and his own opinion of the drawing’s authenticity.  No dissenting opinions were considered. “Problematic connoisseurship and problematic science all around,” said Kline.</p>
<p>Among those who reject the “Principessa” as a Leonardo is the world’s leading expert on Leonardo’s drawings, Carmen Bambach, Curator of Drawings at Metropolitan Museum of Art and currently Mellon Professor at the National Gallery in Washington; and Martin Clayton, Curator of the Royal Collection at Windsor Castle, the world’s largest collection of da Vinci drawings.  </p>
<p>“I have no vested interest here other than to question authoritative judgments in art history and a longstanding desire to keep Leonardo’s and other old masters’ work free of fakes, bogus science, and substandard connoisseurship,” said Kline. “In the case of ‘La Principessa,’ let’s just say it’s at best an issue of mistaken identity that calls for correction.’’  </p>
<p>###</p>
<p>Fred R. Kline &amp; Co .(Fred R. Kline Gallery &amp; Kline Art Research Associates) is owned and directed by Fred and Jann Kline, established in 1979 in Santa Fe, New Mexico. Areas of interest include 18th-20th century American and European Paintings, Drawings, and Sculpture; 19th and early 20th century American Regionalists; 15th-18th century European Old Master Paintings and Drawings; 16th-19th century Spanish Colonial Mexico; and Contemporary Masters.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

