MULTIDISCIPLINARY STUDY OF THE TONGERLO ALAST SUPPER AND ITS ATTRIBUTION TO LEONARDO DA VINCI’S SECOND MILANESE STUDIO

Jean-Pierre Isbouts* Fielding Graduate University, Santa Barbara, CA, USA

Christopher H. Brown Brown Discoveries, LLC, North Carolina, USA

Keywords: Leonardo da Vinci, Last Supper, Multispectral Imaging, Leonardeschi

1. Introduction

For the last 450 years, a remarkably accurate copy of Leonardo da Vinci’s Last Supper has been quietly slumbering in the Premonstratensian Abbey of Tongerlo near Westerlo, less than an hour’s drive from the Belgian city of Antwerp (Figure 1). Its relatively remote location may explain why up to this time, the work has largely escaped broad scholarly attention. In his extensive 2001 monograph Leonardo’s In- cessant Last Supper, which analyzes some fifty 16th century copies of the Last Sup- per, Leo Steinberg only devotes a single page to the work, arguing that “there is no further reason to date the Tongerlo copy in Leonardo’s lifetime.” However, in the fol- lowing paragraph, the author admits that this work, together with the Certosa copy at London’s Royal Academy of Arts, “are now said to be our most accurate copies.” In sum, Steinberg concludes, “given its size, its high quality, and general accuracy, the Tongerlo copy ranks with the finest surviving testimonies to the near-lost Leonardo (original)” [1]. This highly ambivalent judgment is typical for the way modern critics have ap- proached the Tongerlo painting. While very few historians have actually seen the work and praised its remarkable quality, none have dared to associate its verisimilitude with Leonardo’s Milanese workshop. The reason, we believe, is that the work is not on dis- play in a major public museum, where it would inevitably have been subjected to in- tense curatorial inquiry. Furthermore, Leonardo da Vinci is today, 500 years after his passing, at the zenith of his fame. A painting entitled Salvator Mundi, which may have begun as a Leonardo autograph but then suffered from intense overpainting and restoration, made headlines when it sold in 2017 for $450 billion at auction – the highest sum ever paid for a work of art. As a result, hardly a month goes by without someone announcing an “undiscov- ered da Vinci” in the public press. This has made art professionals understandably reluc- tant to make any attributions involving the great master.

* Corresponding author: [email protected] 50 J-P. Isbouts, C.H. Brown - A multidisciplinary study of the Tongerlo Last Supper and its attribution to Leonardo da Vinci’s carbonate, mixedwithoil. calcium and white lead of layer prime grey a of consists ground base The tablecloth. painted the along and figures, the of hands the under ceiling, painted the on visible in Northern Europe, artists generally preferred linen [2]. The seams of these strips are ral. The support consists of five strips of hemp, which further points to an Italian origin; mu- original the of scale the matches closely which cm, 794 by 418 sized and canvas on oil in executed is work The compelling. is workshop Milanese second Leonardo’s humankind through Christ’s sacrifice on the cross. The same arrangement was a and commis - Eucharist; of the stitution a iconography: Christian traditional of gram Last Supper abbot of the Dominican convent of Santa Maria delle Grazie, to execute a fresco of the the and/or Milan, of duke the Sforza, Ludovico by commissioned was artist the 1495, vise thework. early 1500’s, which would undoubtedly have compelled Leonardo to personally super- vide credible evidence that the work was the result of a French royal commission in the pro will we article, this In evacuation). of periods several for (except since ever there been has abbey, and the of possession the into came it when 1545, to back reaches 1507-1509. Figure 1. Studio of Leonardo da Vinci, Last Supper (after Leonardo), known as the Tongerlo copy, a theme. In Florence, both Andrea del Castagno and Domenico Ghirlandaio had painted the entirenorthwall,measuring460by880cm(180350 in.). hall where the friars intended to take their meals. The commissioned work was to cover tionof the last meal shared by Christ with his Apostles,it was an appropriate motif for a Last Supper What’s more, unlike most other copies of Leonardo’s Last Supper of Leonardo’s copies most other unlike more, What’s In the case of the Tongerlo The history of Leonardo’s original mural of the of mural original Leonardo’s of history The 1.1. At the time, there was ample precedent for decorating a refectory with this sacred this with refectory a decorating for precedent ample was there time, the At The OriginalCenacolo in the newly built refectory of the monastery complex (Figure 2). As a depic in the refectory of their monastic patrons, following the established pro- Last Supper Crucifixion , however, the evidence for an attribution to on the other, illustrating the redemption of redemption the other, on the illustrating Last Supper Last Last Supper Last on one side, marking the in the marking side, one on is well known. well Around is , its provenance , its provenance - - - “principal work in the refectory of the delle Gratie (sic)” – meaning, the ga, on June 29, 1497, instructing him to ask Leonardo why he had still not finished his was rarely a happy one. Exasperated, the duke wrote to his secretary, Marchesinoon Stanthe opposite wall – much to the chagrin of the duke, whose workrelationship in less than a year.with LeonardoThe same, however, could not be said about the artist laboring decided to ignore the traditional Italian iconography of the of iconography Italian traditional the ignore to decided well as his observations of both nature and human psychology. What’s more, Leonardo His art was always informed by his empirical study of light and atmospheric effects, as Christ intoindignantdenialsand debate(Figure3). around men the Jesus’ provokes and of center the from shock outwards explodes it how emotional declaration: the exploit to him allowed This him. betray will Apostles twelve the of one that announces Jesus when Gospel, John’s in moment a different during the Byzantine era – depicting the institution of the Eucharist – and instead chose As it appeared in the early 16 early the in appeared it As Grazie. delle Maria Santa the of refectory or Cenacolo the of reconstruction 2. A digital Figure G record time. At the foot of the cross, he proudly added an inscription that proclaims: proclaims: that inscription an added proudly he cross, the of foot the At time. record somewhat casual concern afor linear perspective. by The artist appears to have executed the work in tempered style, Gothic International the of influence under vention, given thequintessentialtaskofdepicting of Sforza’s favored artists, Giovanni Donato di Montorfano (c. 1460 - c. 1503), who was sioned in Milan: whereas Leonardo was charged with painting a io . . D Of course, today we know why Leonardo took several years to complete his mural. Montorfano duly produced a onatus M ontorfanus th , with the year 1495, meaning that Montorfano finished the the finished Montorfano that , meaning the with 1495, year century (Courtesy, Pantheon Studios). (Courtesy, Pantheon century Crucifixion that was entirely in line with Lombard con- Crucifixion . Last Supper Last Last Supper Last Supper established , it was one . 1

- 51

Conservation science in Cultural Heritage 52 J-P. Isbouts, C.H. Brown - A multidisciplinary study of the Tongerlo Last Supper and its attribution to Leonardo da Vinci’s ment and plaster. pig- between bond strong a producing still while technique, oil his of effects same the use to him enable would that process new a create to try to experiment: an on barked em- Leonardo response, In murals. painting for process standard the paint, tempera was that such a range of emotional expressions could not be conveyed in quick-drying we werewitnessingaplayonstagewithliveactors. pression of the face” [3]. ex- the follow should person whole the indeed and hands reflective. The or thoughtful turns sad; others show anger and pity, while others still are amazed, afraid, distracted, another cheerful, is one as weeps; another laughs, one as for ways, different in man ern wallfacedthekitchen,andthereforeabsorbedmuchcondensation. and, as early as 1517, the painting began to flake. Part of the reason is that the north- imposed scenes have beencombined. scenes have imposed 3. Figure Figure 4.LeonardodaVinci, TheLastSupper, 1494-1499.SantaMaria delleGrazie,Milan. To depict a Todepict Leonardo’s notebooks of this time carefully record how “Emotions move the face of

Leonardo da Vinci, Study for the Last Supper, ca. 1495. In this image, the two super two the image, this In 1495. ca. Supper, Last the for Study Vinci, da Leonardo Last Supper Last 2 But the attempt failed; the pigments refused to bind with the surface All of these sentiments are performed right in front of us, as if in this manner was a magnificent idea, but the problem the but idea, magnificent a was manner this in - imaginetoday, early 16 esty ofhisdesire,andsothepictureremainedwithMilanese.” it might be transported safely; but the fact that it was painted on a wall robbed his Maj- who, with cross-stays of wood and iron, might have been able to make it so secure that done, theking“triedbyanypossiblemeanstodiscoverwhethertherewerearchitects be couldn’t this that found engineers his When [4]. expense” for regards any without safely,kingdom… his and into it “carry to engineers his ordered he that impressed so followers, whichversioncomesclosesttotheoriginal? his by lifetime Leonardo’s during executed were that copies three the of specifically, More exist? copy a such does But urgent. quite is vision original Leonardo’s us show the of 20% can that copy faithful a for some need 4). the (Figure Therefore, visible still is fresco original only Brambilla, Pinin restorer, recent most its of judgment the By Artists ing during the 14 the during ing flower- artistic greatest its experienced backwater.had cultural France a become had see the much-admired fresco of the of fresco much-admired the see state by the French King Louis XII. Soon after he invested the city, the king decided to city- this of conquest 1499 the Milan: of history the in event traumatic a by framed is to to France. The evidence for such a claim is compelling. After Louis made a triumphant the another way to satisfy his desire: to commission Leonardo to produce a faithful copy of either 1499orearly1500,after theFrenchinvestmentofduchyMilan. pened, Leonardo had witnessed the use of canvas during his stay in the lagoon city in hap it As distances. long over transported easily and up rolled be could it portantly, im- most and together; sheets stitching by size, any for allow would it did; sometimes over wood panels. It was less expensive; it didn’t split or crack as oak or walnut panels vas, used to make sails, was therefore in ample supply. Canvas had many advantages netian painters, given that Venice was the leading shipbuilding center of Europe – can- Veby adopted quickly was canvas - Europe, Northern in introduced Originally canvas. was medium That panel. wood a or wall a to alternative an as paintings, for support an alternatesolution? for answer,search an and for “no” take to refuse Renaissance: the in did rulers cratic cept the verdictof his engineersandabandonthe idea? Or did he dowhatmost auto- for FrenchartiststolearnthevernacularofItalianRenaissanceart. its artistic pedestal. Leonardo’s signature masterpiece, then, could serve as a key astating model effects of the Black Plague and the Thirty Years War, had toppled France from which took Europe by storm in the latter part of the 15 Renaissance, Florentine the of onset sudden the But Brothers. Limbourg the and ton center of the High Gothic style with painters such as Jean Fouquet, Enguerrand Quar- King Louis had good reasons to want the painting in France. Though it is difficult to The starting point for our inquiry is an anecdote described in the book the in described anecdote an is inquiry our for point starting The 2. like. looked once masterpiece Leonardo’s what see longer no can we result, a As We therefore developed the hypothesis that the French king may have opted for opted have may king French the that hypothesis the developed therefore We As it happened, the late 15 late the happened, it As Vasari’s anecdote left an important question: what did the king do next? Did he ac- Last Supper by Giorgio Vasari, originally published in Florence in 1550. in Florence published Vasari, by originally Giorgio A kingarrivesinMilan fresco on canvas to scale, so that it could be rolled up and brought back th and early 15 early and th century France and–particularly theroyal court at Amboise– th th century had seen the development of a new form of form new a of development the seen had century century when the court of Burgundy was a leading leading a was Burgundy of court the when century Last Supper Last for himself. When he saw it, he was he it, saw he When himself. for th century, combined with the dev- 3 Vasari’s comment Lives of the of Lives - 53

Conservation science in Cultural Heritage 54 J-P. Isbouts, C.H. Brown - A multidisciplinary study of the Tongerlo Last Supper and its attribution to Leonardo da Vinci’s that akingintervenedwithfellowheadofstatefortheservices ofanartist. history modern in instance first the perhaps – Milan in services Leonardo’s retain to bassador at the French court, Francesco Pandolfini, and made a formal, royal request ing Leonardoofbadfaith,andorderinghisreturn. until September. Soderini replied with a thunderous volley on October 9, all but accus- the Signoria, the of president the to letter courteous a wrote d’Amboise, Charles nephew d’Amboise’s hap what pened. not is At that the know, end we as of the agreed return.But three-month period, his the new guarantee governor to of Milan, florins George 150 a of leave to deposit have would Leonardo that and months, three exceed not would furlough ingly issued Leonardo an exit permit on May 30, 1506, with the understanding that the the optical create to effects him allow of oils would on that a plaster pigments wall. various Much with against its better experimenting judgment, again once Florence grudg (today called Palazzo Vecchio). And that project was not going very well. Leonardo was servedin several prominent positions had in the previous family government whose cardinal of King French Charles a VIII. was D’Amboise Milan. of governor the as serve entry into Milan on October 6, the king appointed a man named Georges d’Amboise to ardo ardo fresco, on canvas, for shipment to France. That is the only plausible reason why Leon Leonardo as soon as the artist was back in Milan: a life-size copy of his of copy life-size a Milan: in back was artist the as soon as Leonardo large studio. a up set had now by he where Florence, in certainly and anywhere, that do could he pelling reason for Leonardo to come to Milan in order to paint a picture of the Madonna; king’s advisor, Florimond the Robertet, by some six years earlier. commissioned And been two, there was no already com- had painting the that was saw, we as One, tion. Milan to paint the fresco, the the fresco, the clientsatisfiedandgethimselfhispartnerpaid. see to took it whatever do and Milan to return to invited was Leonardo 1506 in result, the of touch magic the ardo; this meant that the Confraternity believed the painting was more Ambrogio than Leon properly, Translated “unfinished”. still was painting the that claimed which fraternity, be ruled by France. The judge’s ruling went against the artists and sided with the Con- to happened time this at which 1502, in government Milanese the with complaint cial offi- an pay,lodged to Predis refused de Conception, Immaculate the of Confraternity London) that he and Leonardo had previously collaborated on. But when the client, the the of version second the on labor the paintingafterhissubsequentreturntoFlorence. Yarnwinder the with Leonardo charged probably Robertet that suggests This the on instructions. king’s acted undoubtedly who XII Louis to advisor senior a Robertet, Florimond by do’s painting of the KingLouis’ patronage ofLeonardo must have begun very soon after that date. Leonar - original, but also to recruit some of the same Milanese assistants who had collaborated Shockingly,the king himself then intervened. He first summoned the Florentine am- In our opinion, the king knew very well what he was going to commission from from commission to going was he what well very knew king the opinion, our In in Leonardo wanted king the that believe to historians most prompted has This The problem was that at the time, Leonardo was under contract to paint a massive to continued Predis, de Ambrogio Milan, in partner Leonardo’s meantime, the In needed Battle of of Anghiari Battle project project while the artist was still in Milan, and that Leonardo then completed to be in Milan for an extended period of time, not only to work from the the from work to only not time, of period extended an for Milan in be to gonfaloniere Madonna of the Yarnwinder Madonna of the Yarnwinder , in the Great Council Hall of the Palazzo della Signoria Signoria della Palazzo the of Hall Council Great the in , Soderini, asking for an extension of Leonardo’s furlough real master, or so it was felt, was clearly missing. As a As missing. clearly was felt, was it so or master, (now in the National Gallery in Gallery National the in (now Rocks the of Virgin . There are two problems with that asser- , begun around 1500, was commissioned Last Supper Last 5

4 - - - -

then took the unprecedented step of writing to the Signoria the to writing of step unprecedented the took then other stormofprotests. tentions known to the Signoria, becausesuch would undoubtedlyhave unleashed an- in- his make to not why,chose is years. king This even the months, believe, many we take would enterprise 1490’s.an the such of course, part Of latter the in fresco the on that itwasbroughtdirectlyfrom MilantoGaillon. copy had been commissioned by d’Amboise, arguably acting on the king’s orders, and Monsignor had transported from Milan”) [5]. Here is clear evidence that the Milan de porter as 1542 fore remained in the d’Amboise chateau in Gaillon. It is documented in an inventory of common affliction in that era, and died on January 1, 1515. The Leonardo call would esty.”himself Louis Maj- Christian most his to painter Vinci, da Leonardo “Master as to referred now was artist the Signoria, the to Milan of next government the French royal in the that from communication fact the by attested is project the undertake to agreed himself ardo ably on the strength of their experience of a royal commission for Louis XII. That Leon years be retained by other patrons to produce their own copy of the okn udr i drc supervision. direct his under 1549), working c. 1470- (c. d’Oggiono Marco and (1460-1524), Solario Andrea 1495-1549), (active Giampietrino including collaborators, finest his of some of talents the shalled ed at Leonardo’s second Milanese workshop between 1506 and 1509, and that it mar- ambitious ascreatingafaithfulcopyofthe as endeavor an to pertain only could this that and require, may it as time” a such “for wanted Leonardo released for a major project, to be executed “with his own hand” king and the that evidence clear is this view, our In anywhere. do could he which donna, Ma- a of portrait a paint to Leonardo enable to simply terms, friendly on was France which with state a on pressure diplomatic intense such brought have would king the of 129 Revolution. A Gaillon accounting statement,French the datedduring destroyed Januarywas chapel 20,the when 1509,lost listswere unfortunately thewhich remittancelon, to also ask Solario to decorate a number of murals in the chapel of the Château de Gail dispatched to Charles’ chateau in Gaillon. What’s more, d’Amboise used the opportunity Italy. in fighting was himself Louis while France ruled the Thus, during the period known as the “Italian Wars” (1494-1556), so Georges now effectively and withNaples notably in conflicts, other Venice embroiled had become king himself Minister. French The of First to position the d’elevated had XII Louis whom Amboise, Georges uncle, Charles’ with as well as governor, Milanese the d’Amboise, Charles ect, AndreaSolario. thisBytime, Solario hadestablished excellentan relationship with portedto Gaillon in France under the direct supervision of one of the artists on the proj Leonardo hadbecomethecourtpainterofFrenchKing. As an indication of the great importance that Louis attached to the project, the king Six years later, Louis XII succumbed to a severe case of gout (or arthritis), a very a very arthritis), (or gout of case a severe to succumbed XII later, Louis years Six What’s more, there is other substantial evidence that this copy was indeed execut- At some point in late 1508 or early 1509, after the copy was finished, it was trans finished,was was it copy theafter1509,early or 1508 late inpoint some At 2.1. livres and 10 The LastSupperoncanvasistakentoFrance La Cène faicte en toile en grands personnaiges que feu Monseigneur fist ap- fist Monseigneur feu que personnaiges grands en toile en faicte Cène La (“the Last Supper made on canvas with monumental figures, which which figures, monumental with canvas on made Supper Last (“the soldi (around $1,500) 7 Significantly, all three artists would infuture would artists three all Significantly, nostre peintre, nostre à Milan au peintre maistre André de Solario. Last Supper . painter.” All of a sudden, painter.”a “our of All himself. Last Supper Last Supper Last Last Supper 6 It is doubtful that doubtful is It Last Supper copy there- copy was copy , argu- - - - - 55

Conservation science in Cultural Heritage 56 J-P. Isbouts, C.H. Brown - A multidisciplinary study of the Tongerlo Last Supper and its attribution to Leonardo da Vinci’s work to1515,thoughotherauthors areinclinedtogiveitanevenlaterdate[6]. the width closely matches that of the original fresco (Figure 5). Pietro Marani dates this capitalize on his work as one of the lead artists on the royal copy of the monastery at Castellazzo. sequently, Solario was soon at work in painting several wealthy convents clamored to have the same painting in their refectories. Con Italy, Northern through all and radiated had fresco Milan of Leonardo’s fame the then, Figure 5. Giampietrino, The Last Supper after Leonardo, also known as the Certosa copy, ca. 1515. church,whichthenunderwasconstruction Belgiannearthevillage of Tongerlo. acquiredwas by it a cleric1545, namedIn Europe. AbbotNorthern Streytersin for cities 450prosperous guilders most for the the choirof of one a newwas abbey time that to takenatpaintingAntwerp, waswhich sale.The for up put wasestate his andaway for periods during times of war and political upheaval, it has been there ever since. the choirtoday.” wall. And so he gave the order to have a copy made, and that is the copy that a hangs in on painted was it since him with it take not could he that disappointed very was he in bad repair. And that when a king of France, who conquered Milan, saw the painting, Dutch, dated1547,whichvalidatesourinitialhypothesistoaremarkabledegree: “Giampietrino,” wasalsotappedtocreateanothercopy. Giovanni Pietro Rizzoli, who is referred to in Leonardo’s notebooks as “Gian Pietro” or Leonardo’s original,basedonhisexperienceofcollaboratingthe Tongerlo copy. vived reveal the extraordinary mastery of Solario in capturing both the form and spirit of wasdestroyed during World War II.Butthefewblackandwhite images thathavesur This painting, known as the “Certosa di Pavia copy,” is likewise noteworthy since noteworthy likewise copy,”is Pavia di “Certosa the as known painting, This to able was he where Italy, to returned Solario Andrea 1509 after point some At 2.2. Bythe time the 1542 inventory was taken, Georges d’Amboise himself had passed In the archives of the Tongerlo Abbey itself is a handwritten account in 16 “It is said that the painting is made after an original, painted on a wall, that is now is that wall, a on painted original, an after made is painting the that said is “It Another prominent artist who had worked on the painting for the French king, king, French the for painting the on worked had who artist prominent Another The Leonardeschiproduceothercopies 9 10 Very few photographs exist of this remarkable work, which another copy, this time in fresco, for the Last Supper th century 8 Save . By - - n at Mnc, A w te sprmoe ec o te or rnia gop from Tongerlo groups principal fourand London on the Leonardo’s of original each composition superimposed thenin the Milan we fresco (Figure CA, 6). Monica, Santa in intheRoyal Academyof ArtsinLondon. Using thedigital facilities ofPantheon Studios digital images of the Tongerlo canvas and its nearest copy, the Giampietrinosearch projectcanvas nowwas organized in two phases. During the first, we obtained high-resolution then acquiredin1821bytheRoyal Academy of Arts inLondon[7]. Italy and inal in beyond. The copy was Milan had throughout Certosa famous become a smaller Carthusian convent, and later claimed by the Certosa when Leonardo’s orig- the work in its inventory until that year, so it is possible that it was originally ordered by to refers it di copy, as erature Pavia” did the not “Certosa list monastery this particular Galeazzo Gian Milan, of Duke first the Visconti.by 1395 in established lit- the Though complex monastery vast the Pavia”), of (“Charterhouse Pavia di Certosa the of tory inven the in appears it later, 1626, in a century Over establish. to able been has one Figure 6. Thomas, James the Great and Philip, from a) Leonardo’s original and; b) the Tongerlo copy. Tohypothesesverifyourauthorship aboutthe theTongerlo of 3. Unfortunately, the upper third of this painting was cut away, for no reason that any- The IRRstudyoftheTongerlo Last Supper Last SupperLast b a , our re our , - - 57

Conservation science in Cultural Heritage 58 J-P. Isbouts, C.H. Brown - A multidisciplinary study of the Tongerlo Last Supper and its attribution to Leonardo da Vinci’s painted high up on a wall. Significantly, Giampietrino’s later London London later Giampietrino’s was Significantly, wall. a original on up the high painted that fact the notwithstanding fresco, the of replica exact almost an achieve they could manner this in Only cartoons fresco. the same for used the been used originally had artists that the that is then, conclusion, obvious most The fer. trans mechanical of form some required have would it drawing; a freehand with ized real been have not could match close a Such intact. largely remained figures the of positioning the figures, degree. the of execution remarkable the in to differences obvious fresco were there While original the of composition the matched groups four indication oftheusecartoonsfortracingfigures”(Figure7). plication, executed with a dry medium,” Mr. Lainé wrote in his analysis. ap “This hand is free no with a strong outline sharp and strict very a show faces the “All Lainé. David expert, IPARC’schief by conducted tests IRR the by out borne was fresco Milan the mark was different. figures edly the of dimension and spacing The fresco. original the match not tested by the fact that long after his death, his cartoons would remain in active circula Figure 7. Infrared reflectogram of Thomas and James the Greater, showing the outline of the the of outline the figures. showing Greater, the James and Thomas of reflectogram Infrared 7. Figure The result was quite astonishing. In the case of the Tongerlo canvas, three of the the of three Tongerlothe of canvas, case the In astonishing. quite was result The The hypothesis that the artists of the Tongerlo canvas used the original cartoons of The idea that Leonardo would carefully preserve his designs and cartoons is at- is cartoons and designs his preserve carefully would Leonardo that idea The Last Supper Last did did - - - - - French king. French hard worked to mimic a so finish, fresco as to of matchthe the the expectations client, portraits fromthisperiod,including theangelinLondon reflection of lightsubtle on the lower passages ofthe the face closely resemble Leonardo’sand other sfumato its of delicacy The 9). (Figure Apostles other the of that and Jesus, of side right the at painted traditionally the Apostle, John of face the between pigments wereappliedduringarestorationinthe1930’s. Figure 8. Infrared reflectogram of Judas, Peter and John in the Tongerlo Last Supper. The darker ate the effect of a work work a of effect the ate tocre attempt a deliberate betrays 8).technique This (Figure film paint diluted highly a with over brushed lightly then were zones These zone. per direction changing lines with lines, parallel small of consists layer preparatory the that way the by struck was which Leonardo hadtriedtoreproducethestrikingrealismofhisMilaneseportraits). with pigments of blend curious the in executed (albeit form fresco in painting anticipated. To understand this, we should remember that King Louis XII had seen the to Mr. Lainéareextensiveandspreadovertheentiresurface. according layer, which paint the in losses and damage the revealed also flectograms in egry ogt fe b the by after sought eagerly tion, the master’s drawings, long after the master had passed away.passed had master the after long drawings, master’s the by inspired closely be to appear followers Leonardo’s by painted paintings numerous 4. Even a casual observer of the Tongerlo Tongerlo the of observer casual a Even While analyzing While the ofanalyzing reflectogram Judas, Peter and John, for Mr.example, Lainé not had we that phenomenon remarkable another revealed also tests IRR The Is theportraitofJohnaLeonardoautograph? l fresco al Leonardeschi . In sum, while creating this painting, the artists artists the painting, this creating while sum, In . Last Supper Last n ohr rit.Ti epan why explains This artists. other and will recognize the contrast contrast the recognize will Virgin oftheRocks 11 These and other re- other and These . - 59

Conservation science in Cultural Heritage 60 J-P. Isbouts, C.H. Brown - A multidisciplinary study of the Tongerlo Last Supper and its attribution to Leonardo da Vinci’s and theSwan ardo throughout his career. It bears a striking resemblance to Leonardo’s study of Leon fascinated that masculinity feminine of model androgynous the to corresponds John of Finally,face contours. the outline the outside painting of liberty the took artist the figures, other the unlike that shows John of reflectogram IPARC’s Furthermore, and eyes, Louvre the of forehead and eyes nose, the to similar are John of forehead nose, the that found Parfenov Prof. technique. brushwork unique artist’s the identify to painting a in details certain of statistics histogram luminosity extracting Parfenov of the St. Petersburg Electrotechnical University. Histogram analysis involves make thisthefirstinstanceofaLeonardoautographonBelgian soil. would which himself, Leonardo by painted indeed was John of face the that believe tirely the tirely work of its master, than that of rather the 20 en is face John’s of sfumato soft the that shows also John of reflectance VNIR The technique of rendering a human face through such subtle nuances in light and shadow. hs yohss s ute spotd y hsorpi aayi b Po. Vadim Prof. by analysis histographic a by supported further is hypothesis This In our opinion, no other artist in the first half of the 1500’s had yet mastered this this mastered yet had 1500’s the of half first the in artist other no opinion, our In Figure 9.Judas,Peter, andJohn,froma)Leonardo’s original;andb)theTongerlo copy. , forexample(Figure10). th century restorer. century we Therefore, Mona Lisa. Mona a b Leda - - • for Leda and the Swan, ca. 1505-6. Figure 10. a) Detail of Peter and John from the Tongerlo canvas; b) and Leonardo da Vinci, Study • • • •

nese studio(1507-1513),asfollows: the painting were executed by three leading associates of Leonardo’s second Mila- Other than the face of John, stylistic analysis suggests that the individual figures in John wasverylikelypaintedbyLeonardodaVinci. freedom with which the artist went beyond the contour lines. the Therefore, face of the and sfumato, its of delicacy exceptional the in figures other the from different – – – – 5. little from the 1929 fire and the subsequent 20 subsequent the and fire 1929 the from little relatively suffered has portrait this that shows John of reflectogram infrared The new Tongerlo Abbey in 1545. of the abbot to the sold it was d’Amboise, George and XII of Louis death the After in 1542accordingtoaninventorydrawnupatthattime. present still was it where 1509, of January in France in Gaillon de Château the to painting was commissioned by King Louis XII of France, and that it the was that transported suggest documentation other and inventories receipts, Correspondence, (1507-1513). studio Milan second Leonardo’s in Tongerlocanvas the This of origin Milan. the in place would fresco original the for used were that cartoons same the of some the that Tongerlothe thesis support The IRR tests In sum,thisstudyproducedthefollowingfindings: Matthew -ThaddeusSimon:Marcod’Oggiono : Thomas -JamesMajorPhilip Andrea Solario Judas -Peter:Giampietrino Bartholomew -JamesMinor Andrew: Giampietrino Conclusion a 12 th century restoration. It is strikingly strikingly is It restoration. century Last Supper Supper Last b was painted using using was painted 61

Conservation science in Cultural Heritage 62 J-P. Isbouts, C.H. Brown - A multidisciplinary study of the Tongerlo Last Supper and its attribution to Leonardo da Vinci’s bishoprics were bought or sold for the considerable influence that they could wield, wield, regardless ofthespiritualabilitiesindividualinvolved. could they that influence considerable the for sold or bought were bishoprics when such positions were prized for their political rather than spiritual value, and many a at became bishop age 14. himself XI. in This was Louis Georges not a unusual time for had regions of been a various governor his d’Amboise, while brother, VIII, Charles permission ofthePremonstratensian Abbey of Tongerlo, Belgium. gracious the with conducted and Belgium; IMEC Carolina; North of LLC Discoveries, • the same thing, and so he boldly asked the king “what sort of works he wanted from from wanted he works of sort “what king the asked boldly he so and thing, same the for this artist was so urgent, why not tell the Signoria the reason? Pandolfini wondered need the If execute. to Leonardo wanted he that hand” his by “things the about spect circum- remarkably was Louis that is account this about striking so is What hand.” his before myarrival.Heisagood master, and I like tohaveanumberofthingsby would mand him to place himself immediately at my service, and that he does not leave Milan com- and task this with him to charge Signoria your him that See me. wish for I things some make because Milan, in living is who Leonardo, Master painter, your need I Signoria after the audience, and then quoted the king’s words verbatim: “Tell them that other talentedartists,notablyinVenice. many omitting while Florence of duchy the in artists on focused Vasari’slargely book on the why in republics” model This of explains Europe. Athenian the few “democratic propa this of ganda sought to sway a wary Florentine purpose public that had long The prided itself on being rule. one his for legitimacy seek to initiated Cosimo that cult propaganda intense the embraced wholeheartedly He I. Cosimo Duke by led regime pigment). Hethenappliedathicklayerofeggtempera. a seal of pitch and gesso (a binding agent consisting of chalk, gypsum, and lead white memorie riguardantilavitaeleoperediLeonardodaVinci; doc.61. e Documenti Beltrami, L. From lui.” con convenera se tempo quello in finirlo ad giano obli lo che sua mane de sottoscripti capituli li lui con faciamo se et Refettorio d’esso Fazada altra ad poi attendere per principiata, Gratie delle Refettorio del l’opera sca 5 4 3 2 1 Notes This study was funded by Fielding Graduate University of Santa Barbara, CA; Brown Acknowledgments – – – on the Tongerlo canvastocreateafull-sizecopyoftheirown: working of experience the leveraged then artists three these Significantly, of each “His Majesty summoned me to Him,” Pandolfini duly reported to his masters at the We should remember that Vasari became a client of the new authoritarian Medici Instead of using wet plaster al fresco, Leonardo prepared a dry wall surface, using fini- perché Fior.no Leonardo solicitare de’ “Item reads: sentence complete The Among others, George’s father, Pierre d’Amboise, was a chamberlain to was Charles a father, chamberlain d’Amboise, George’s Pierre others, Among

Marco d’Oggiono: Écouen copy (canvas), 1524-1530, now at the Château Château the at now 1524-1530, Écouen (France) (canvas), copy Écouen d’Oggiono: Marco London (UK) Giampietrino: Certosa copy (canvas), 1520, now at the Royal Academies of Art, (fresco),1514;lostduringWorldWar Castellazocopy Andrea Solario: II - - [7] [6] [5] [4] [3] [2] [1] Vinci Legacy. New York: Apollo Publishers,2019. Christopher H.Brown, The DaVinci Legacy. New York: Apollo Publishers,2019. XII, LettertotheSignoriaofFlorence,January14,1507; Archivio diStatoFirenze. for us such a time as may enable him to carry out the work we intend him to do.” Louis you, as affectionately as we beg we can, to be Milan, in good be enough to to us, allow the said helping Leonardo God to work soon, shall we as and hand, own his with us ardo da Vinci, painter to your city of Florence, and intend to make him do something for where headmiredthecanvas“inanexcellentstateofpreservation.” the abbey’s archives. the at archivist principal Heijst, van of Abbey Tongerlo,in document this identifying for Kees Father to We grateful are hangt.” coir den in dat sijn te t’selve segt men feijtself muur de conter wel contrefeyten, om the dat tegen te hebben gegeven order die maar was, geschildert overmits nemen mocht mede niet die thy da was leet seer hem wanneer eenen coninck van vrankrijk Milanen gewonnen hadde, siende dese schilderij gemaect is in Milaan, nu zeer beschaedigt, tegen eene muer geschildert sijnde. En dat The DaVinci Legacy. New York: Apollo Publishers,2019. as well as their subsequent oeuvre, see Jean-Pierre Isbouts and Christopher H. Brown, tures ofourLady, andotherthings,dependingonwhatspringstomind.” letter, pic- Pandolfini’s to small “A of according number airily replied king the “Oh,” lic. Leonardo.” But the king had no intention of divulging his plans to the Florentine repub the sun. against protection as serve to dyed and procured were curtains special 1594, in that the friars took the preservation of their valuable canvas seriously is attested by the fact

References 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 R.H. Marijnissen, Het Da Vinci Doek van de Tongerlo,van van Abdij Doek VinciThat 4. Da p. Het 1959; Marijnissen, R.H. The original text reads: “Men segt dat de patroon daer de selve schilderije near near schilderije selve de daer patroon de dat segt “Men reads: text original The Leonardo, with collaboration their and artists these of description detailed a For “Very dear and close friends,” the king began, “As we have need of Master Leon For a of discussion the use of see Isbouts and Leonardo’s cartoons, Jean-Pierre For this attribution, see Jean-Pierre Isbouts and Christopher H. Brown, The Da Da The Brown, H. Christopher and Isbouts Jean-Pierre see attribution, this For J. Murray, The Academy, 1882. The author also visited the abbey of Tongerlo, Tongerlo, of abbey the visited also author The 1882. The Academy, Murray, J. lutionary Artist. New York: St. Martin’s Press. Isbouts, J.P. and Brown, C. H. (2017), Young Leonardo, The Evolution of a Revo- versity ofChicagoPress. Barcilon, P. B. and Marani, P. (2001), Leonardo: The Last Supper. Chicago: Uni- Algiers 1953-1954,p.263. Paris- d’Art, Etudes in Loire,” Val de du International Congrès du munications Com Vinci, de Léonard de Pensée la “L’art et Martin-Demezil, J. and Möller E. architetti; 1568Edition. e Vasari, scultori Giorgio da Le in: Vinci,” Vite pittori, de’ “Lionardo eccellenti più 1989; p.144. Press, University Yale Haven: New Painting. on Leonardo (Ed.), Kemp Martin de l’institutroyaldupatrimoineartistique,X,1967-1968,pp. 16-31. Lefeve, Rene, Het laatste avondmaal van Tongerlo: Materiele gegevens. Bulletin 2001; p.244. Supper.Last Leonardo’sIncessant (2001) L. New Steinberg, York: Books, Zone - - - - 63

Conservation science in Cultural Heritage 64 J-P. Isbouts, C.H. Brown - A multidisciplinary study of the Tongerlo Last Supper and its attribution to Leonardo da Vinci’s Lisa Myth Lisa Vinci: da Leonardo on books three of coauthor the tianity Geographic National nine of books, author including the is He CA. Barbara, Santa in University ate shows and is the host of the TV series TV the of host the is and shows da Leonardostesso. fia a infrarossi, inoltre, suggeriscono che il volto di Giovanni nel dipinto sia stato dipinto co d’Oggiono sotto la supervisione di Leonardo. Le scansioni effettuate con spettrogra- progettocollaborativo che coinvolse Leonardeschi Giampietrino, AndreaSolario Mar- e e il come tra 1507 il 1509, di Leonardo milanese di bottega Tongerlonella fu prodotta Cena l’Ultima disponibili, prove base delle che, sulla si sostiene Nell’articolo frarossi). ain- (Riflettografia dall’IRR particolare in scientifico, dall’esame integrate sono teraria hautilizzato unapproccio multidisciplinare, incuiconoscenza tradizionale ricercae let- della sua provenienza e uno studio multispettrale condotto da IMEC e IPARC. Lo studio rante l’Ultima Cena nell’Abbazia di Tongerlo, in Belgio. Vi è cui una revisione dettagliata face ofJohninthepaintingwaspaintedbyLeonardohimself. Leonardo’s supervision. Furthermore, the infrared spectography scans suggest that the Search for the Last Supper art. Together Dr.with Dr. and Contemporary produced Isbouts, Brown Surrealist, Renaissance, on focused institute research a Discoveries, Brown of director the as serves and States, United the in Dalí Salvador by works of collectors prominent most presented and published to both national and international audiences. History Channel. Dr. IsboutslivesinSantaMonica,CA. and art on for Disney,history programs several rected TelevisionPublic ABC, and the Brown livesinCornelius,NC. involving involving the project as a and 1509, 1507 collaborative between workshop Milanese in Leonardo’s argues that based on the available evidence, the evidence, available the on based that argues Tongerlo Thearticle Reflectography). IRR(Infrared including examination, by scientific mented aug and research literary connoisseurship with traditional approach, multidisciplinary by IMEC and IPARC.conducted study as a The used a study multispectral composite in the Abbey of Tongerlo, Belgium, including a detailed review of its provenance as well Jean-Pierre Isbouts Biographical notes Questo articolo presenta i risultati di uno studio durato due anni della tela raffigu tela della anni due durato studio uno di i risultati presenta articolo Questo Riassunto Brown Heath Christopher This article presents the findings from a two-year study of the of study two-year a from findings the presents article This Summary which have sold 2 million copies. million 2 sold have which Togetheris he Brown, Heath Christopher with , and , Leonardeschi

Young Leonardo. Young

The Biblical World, is an art historian and a doctoral professor at Fielding Gradu- Giampietrino, Giampietrino, Andrea Solario, and Marco d’Oggiono under and The Search for the Mona Lisa is a practicing oral and maxillofacial surgeon who has who surgeon maxillofacial and oral practicing a is

Dr. Isbouts has been on numerous radio and TV TV and radio numerous on been has Isbouts Dr. In the Footsteps of Jesus, and

The Search of Masterpieces of Search The The Da Vinci Legacy, The Mona Mona The Legacy, Vinci Da The Last Supper Last for Public Television. Dr. Last Supper Last The Story of Chris- . He has also di also has He . He is one of the was produced was canvas

The The - - -