Archives Scrapbooks

This image is a vintage press clipping from Burrelle’s Press Clipping Bureau, dated February 23, 1950. The clipping is from the San Francisco, Calif. Examiner, and is cataloged under Circ. 228,522 and S. 606,349.

The headline reads:
“CRITICS WARY OF ‘MONA LISA’”

The article reports on a major art controversy: A portrait believed to be an earlier version of Leonardo da Vinci’s “Mona Lisa” — claimed to be the “original” — was returned to a New York bank vault to await expert appraisal.

Key details from the article:

• Origin: The painting was examined by Dr. Thomas Macaughty Judson, a former curator at the Vatican’s Gicognara collection. He declared it authentic after studying it visually, with X-rays, and microscopically. He believes it predates the Louvre version by several years.
• Provenance: The painting has been in the Vernon family (American heirs of William Henry Judson) since 1797. They acquired it from France, possibly as a gift from Marie Antoinette. It was later sent to the Fogg Art Museum at Harvard for cleaning, and experts then dated it to the early 16th century.
• Value: The Vernons theorized the portrait could be worth a million dollars.
• Brushwork Analysis: Dr. Judson believed it was painted by Da Vinci himself. He theorized that the sitter in this “Mona Lisa” was the same model portrayed in the Louvre painting.
• Expert Skepticism: Sir Kenneth Clark, a British expert on old masters, declined to comment, cryptically saying, “It’s happened before and could happen again.” He also noted he had never heard of Dr. Judson.

The article notes that a picture will appear on page 22, and includes a parenthetical note: “(In London, Sir Kenneth Clark...)”

Formatting and Layout:

• Header: Light blue-green banner with “Burrelle’s” logo (with scissors), established 1888, Barclays 7-5371, 165 Church Street – New York.
• Subheader: “SAN FRANCISCO, CAL. EXAMINER” with circulation numbers.
• Date: Clearly displayed as “FEB 23 1950.”
• Headline: In large, bold, all-caps typeface.
• Body Text: Two columns with standard newspaper layout, including subheadings like “X-RAY STUDY” and “BRUSH WORK.”
• The paper shows signs of aging — yellowing and slight wear.

Historical Context:

This 1950 article reflects a recurring theme in art history: claims of “lost” or “earlier” versions of masterpieces like the Mona Lisa. Such claims often spark intense debate between scholars, collectors, and institutions, especially when high value and prestige are involved. The skepticism of established experts like Sir Kenneth Clark contrasts with the confident assertions of lesser-known academics like Dr. Judson — a common dynamic in art authentication disputes.

In summary, this clipping is a fascinating historical document capturing a moment of high-stakes art controversy, with claims of a “second authentic Mona Lisa,” expert disagreements, and family tradition intersecting with art science and market value.

The image appears to be a newspaper clipping from the San Francisco Examiner dated February 23, 1950. The headline reads "Critics Wary of 'Mona Lisa'" and discusses a claim that a portrait discovered in New York was declared to be an earlier version of Leonardo da Vinci's "Mona Lisa" than the famous painting in the Louvre.

The article details how the portrait was returned to a bank vault after being exhibited in New York and is awaiting the judgment of international art experts. It mentions that the painting was examined by Dr. Thomas Macoughtry Judson, a former curator of the collection of the Vatican, who declared the portrait authentic.

The article also mentions an X-ray study conducted by Dr. Judson, who examined the canvas visually, by X-rays, infrared rays, and microscopically, and concluded that it was painted by Leonardo da Vinci several years before the Louvre's "Mona Lisa." The portrait has been in the possession of a prominent American family since 1797, and it is theorized that the painting might be worth a million dollars.

The article also discusses the brushwork and the sitter of the portrait, theorizing that the model was the same as the one depicted in the Louvre's "Mona Lisa." A comment from Sir Kenneth Clark, an expert on old masters, is also included, stating that such a scenario has happened before and could happen again.

This image is a newspaper clipping from the San Francisco Examiner dated February 23, 1950. The headline reads "CRITICS WARY OF 'MONA LISA'." The article discusses a portrait that was declared to be an earlier "Mona Lisa" by Leonardo da Vinci than the famous one in the Louvre. The painting was returned to a bank vault to await the judgment of international art experts.

The article mentions that the painting was exhibited in New York and declared authentic by Dr. Thomas Macoughty Judson, a former curator of the Cicognara collection of the Vatican. However, George Salles, the director of the Louvre Museum in Paris, declared the Mona Lisa in the Louvre to be the original by da Vinci.

The article also discusses the various examinations conducted on the canvas, including visual examination, X-rays, infrared rays, and microscopic examination, all of which convinced Dr. Judson that da Vinci painted it several years before the Louvre version. The present owners of the painting are Dr. Ambrose W. Vernon and his sister-in-law, Mrs. Alice C. E. Vernon.

The article concludes by mentioning the opinion of Sir Kenneth Clark, a British expert on old masters, who cryptically stated that such discoveries have happened before and could happen again.

The image depicts a clipping from a newspaper or magazine article, likely from the early 20th century, as indicated by the vintage style and black-and-white photograph. The clipping is attached to a piece of paper with a header that reads "Buffelles Press Clipping Bureau" and "San Francisco, Cal. Examiner." The article is titled "Critics Wary of 'Mona Lisa'" and discusses the controversy surrounding the authenticity of a painting believed to be the famous "Mona Lisa" by Leonardo da Vinci.

The article mentions that the painting was returned to a bank vault in Paris after being declared a forgery by experts. It also highlights the involvement of Dr. Thomas Macouchy Judson, a former curator of the Gicorama collection of the Vatican, who examined the painting and declared it inauthentic. The article further discusses the painting's history, including its ownership by a prominent American family and its eventual donation to the Fogg Art Museum at Harvard University.

The clipping provides a glimpse into the art world's fascination with the "Mona Lisa" and the ongoing debate surrounding its authenticity, showcasing the importance of expert opinions and the impact of such controversies on the art market and public perception.

The image is a clipping from the San Francisco Examiner, dated February 23, 1950. The clipping discusses the controversy surrounding a portrait called "Mona Lisa," which was exhibited in New York City and claimed to be an earlier version of the famous "Mona Lisa" by Leonardo da Vinci. The clipping includes a headline "CRITICS WARY OF 'MONA LISA'" and provides details about the portrait's authenticity and its return to Paris for expert evaluation. It mentions Doctor Judson, a former curator of the Cigognara collection, who examined the painting and expressed skepticism about its authenticity.

The image shows a scanned newspaper clipping from the Burlington Press Clipping Bureau, dated February 22, 1913. The article is titled "CRITICS WARY OF 'MONA LISA'" and is sourced from the San Francisco Examiner. The article discusses the famous painting Mona Lisa by Leonardo da Vinci and provides details about its history, authenticity, and recent events.

Key Details from the Article:

1. Headline and Context:

   • The headline, "CRITICS WARY OF 'MONA LISA'", suggests skepticism or caution regarding the painting's authenticity or condition.
   • The article references a New York Dec. 22 (INS) report, indicating the source of the information.

2. Portrait of Mona Lisa:

   • The article notes that a portrait declared to be an earlier "Mona Lisa" by Leonardo da Vinci was exhibited in the Louvre Museum in Paris.
   • The painting was returned to a bank vault after a general judgment of international art experts.

3. Exhibition and Authentication:

   • The painting was exhibited in New York by Dr. Paul Joseph Judson, a former curator of the Cloegora collection of the Vatican.
   • Dr. Judson claimed the painting was the original Mona Lisa as described in the Louvre, but it was identified as a ray study by Dr. Judson himself, a fellow of the American Academy in Rome.
   • Dr. Judson stated that the canvas had been rayed and microscopically painted and was convinced Da Vinci painted it several years before the famous Mona Lisa in the Louvre.

4. Ownership and Value:

   • The portrait was owned by Dr. Ambrose W. Vernon of Hanover, N.H., and his sister-in-law, Mrs. Alice C. R. Vernon.
   • The Vernons theorized the portrait might be worth a million dollars.
   • The painting was brought to the Fogg Art Museum at Harvard University for cleaning, where it was sold to the Louvre. However, the Louvre believed the canvas belonged to the early sixteenth century, contradicting the claim of being an original by Da Vinci.

5. Expert Opinion:

   • Dr. Judson defended his examination, stating that the painting was convinced to be Da Vinci's work.
   • Sir Kenneth Clark, an outstanding British expert on old masters, commented that he had never heard of the painting again and could not comprehend its reappearance. He suggested that if an intelligent man said he never heard of Judson, that would be sufficient information.

Visual Elements:

• The top of the clipping features the Burlington Press Clipping Bureau logo, indicating the source of the clipping.
• The article is neatly formatted with a clear headline, subheadings, and structured paragraphs.
• The text is in black ink on a white background, typical of newspaper clippings from the early 20th century.

Summary:

The article highlights controversy surrounding a purported earlier version of the Mona Lisa, with conflicting opinions from experts. It emphasizes the skepticism of critics and the involvement of notable figures like Dr. Judson and Sir Kenneth Clark, underscoring the debate over the painting's authenticity and historical significance.

This image depicts a vintage newspaper clipping from Burrelle's Press Clipping Bureau. It is dated Feb 23 1950, from the "San Francisco, Cal. EXAMINER" with a headline that reads "CRITICS WARY OF 'MONA LISA'". The article discusses a painting declared to be an earlier version of Leonardo da Vinci's "Mona Lisa" than the one in the Paris Louvre. Dr. Thomas Macoughtry Judson, a former curator of the Cicognara collection of the Vatican, examined the painting and declared it authentic after visual, X-ray, infrared rays, and microscopic examination. He believed Da Vinci painted it several years before the Mona Lisa in the Louvre. The painting was once in the hands of a prominent American family since 1797, and its present owners at the time of the article are mentioned to be Dr. Ambrose W. Vernon and his sister-in-law, Mrs. Alice C. E. Vernon.

Additionally, there is skepticism from other experts, such as Sir Kenneth Clark in London, regarding the authenticity of the painting. The article notes that Mrs. Vernon theorized the painting could be worth a million dollars and that the Vernons are descendants of William Henry Judson, who brought the picture from France as a gift from Queen Marie Antoinette. The article concludes by mentioning a disagreement among experts regarding the painting's authenticity, attributing it to the early sixteenth century based on cleaning tests at Harvard University's Fogg art museum.

The clipping features the press clipping bureau's logo, address, and contact information at the top. The physical newspaper appears somewhat aged, with the paper color indicating some yellowing due to time.

This image shows a newspaper clipping mounted on a blue card from Burrelle's Press Clipping Bureau, located at 165 Church Street, New York. The clipping is dated February 23, 1950, and is from the San Francisco, Cal. Examiner.

The headline of the article reads: "CRITICS WARY OF 'MONA LISA'." The article discusses a portrait that was declared to be an earlier version of the "Mona Lisa" by Leonardo da Vinci than the famous one in the Paris Louvre. This painting had been exhibited in New York and declared authentic by Dr. Thomas Macoultry Judson, a former curator of the Cicognara collection of the Vatican. The painting was returned to a bank vault to await the judgment of international art experts.

The article explains that Dr. Judson examined the canvas using various techniques including X-rays and infrared rays and concluded that Leonardo da Vinci painted it several years before the famous "Mona Lisa." The portrait had been in the possession of a prominent American family since 1797, and its current owners in 1950 were Dr. Ambrose W. Vernon of Hanover, New Hampshire, and his sister-in-law, Mrs. Alice C. E. Vernon, who theorized the portrait might be worth a million dollars.

The Vernons inherited the painting from William Henry Judson, who brought it from France as a gift of Queen Marie Antoinette. It was sent to the Fogg Art Museum at Harvard University for cleaning in 1935, where technicians believed it dated from the early sixteenth century.

Dr. Judson believed the brushwork was from da Vinci's brushes, and theorized that the sitter for this "Vernon Mona Lisa" was the same model as the one in the Louvre painting.

In London, Sir Kenneth Clark, a noted British expert on old masters, commented cryptically that similar situations had happened before and could happen again, but declined to comment further due to insufficient information and his lack of knowledge of Judson.

This image is a newspaper clipping from the San Francisco Examiner, dated February 23, 1950, and distributed by Burrelle's Press Clipping Bureau in New York. It features the headline "Critics Wary of 'Mona Lisa'" and discusses the discovery of a portrait believed to be an earlier version of Leonardo da Vinci's famous Mona Lisa, currently housed in the Louvre in Paris.

The article mentions Dr. Thomas Macoughtry Judson, a former curator of the Vatican's Cicognara collection, who exhibited and authenticated the painting in New York. Dr. Judson claimed to have examined the work visually, microscopically, and with X-rays and infrared rays, concluding it was painted by Leonardo da Vinci several years before the Louvre's Mona Lisa. The painting had been part of an American family collection since 1797 and was owned by Dr. Ambrose W. Vernon and Mrs. Alice C.E. Vernon.

Mrs. Vernon theorized the painting might be worth a million dollars. The article also notes skepticism among critics, including Sir Kenneth Clark, a British expert on old masters, who provided a cryptic comment but expressed doubts, stating that he had never heard of Dr. Judson.

The image shows two small newspaper clippings mounted on a light gray background.

• On top is a pale blue card from a press clipping service (Burtelle’s Press Clipping Bureau) with a scissors logo, the text “ESTABLISHED 1888,” and contact lines for San Francisco and New York. It’s stamped “FEB 23 1950.”
• Below is an old orange-brown clipping with a large headline: “CRITICS WARY OF ‘MONA LISA’.” The article discusses a portrait claimed to be an earlier Mona Lisa by Leonardo da Vinci, its exhibition in New York, the involvement of experts, and discussions about authenticity, provenance, and brush work. It mentions X-ray studies and the painting’s ownership by the Vernon family and others, along with references to the Louvre painting and efforts to judge its authenticity.