Axel Vervoordt Co is a family-led business. Boris (left) and Axel (right).Image Credit: TEFAF

In a surprising turn for the international art fair circuit, Dominique Savelkoul  stepped down as Managing Director of the European Fine Art Foundation, (TEFAF), at the end of December in what was described by the foundation this week as "differing views on the strategic direction."  This marks the second leadership change in just over one year at one of the world’s largest fair providers for fine art, antiques, and design, covering 7,000 years of art history.

TEFAF confirmed this week that, Boris Vervoordt, one of the sons of Belgian art and design dealer Axel Vervoordt, and a driving force behind his father's influential Axel Vervoordt Co, has been named chairman since 1 January 2026 and that the fair's executive committee members will each take turns leading the foundation for a period of six months. Vervoordt is the first non-Dutch chairman to steer Europe's prominent art foundation and on paper, brings visibility, experience, and an enviable network of ultra-high-net-worth clients to the foundation's annual New York and Maastricht fairs.  

Well known in the art world for cultivating an enviable black book of high-profile collectors and luxury tastemakers, Vervoordt arrives to TEFAF's management with deep familiarity of the fair’s culture and commercial ecosystem having been a participant from the fairs beginnings. Active in the international world of art, design, and antiques since the late 1960s, the family of Belgian art dealers have sold everything from Egyptian marble bowls, to contemporary Japanese paintings and Le Corbusier armchairs.

In it's current iteration, Axel Vervoordt Co, was founded in Belgium in 2011 (and in Hong Kong in 2014). Their  art gallery, arts and antiques trading organization, interior design and real estate development divisions are headquartered, since 2017, outside Antwerp, at an industrial complex known as Kanaal.  Part gallery, part exhibition space, Vervoordt's showcase institution is housed in a former malting distillery and malting complex built in 1857 on a shipping canal leading to the port of Antwerp, though many Vervoordt-held companies are registered elsewhere. 

Rostec boss Sergei Chemezov, Vladimir Putin and multi-millionaire Sergei Adonyev

In the 1980s Axel Vervoordt purchased the floor you see in this photo of his library at 's-Gravenwezel castle, the medieval fortress surrounded by 60-hectares of park land he calls home. After the parquet de Versailles floor was restored and published in the October 1986 issue of Architectural Digest, French authorities informed him that the flooring had been stolen from a French château.

Later, in March 1998, at a time when the art world's big players paid little attention to whether an artwork offered for sale could have been stolen during the Second World War, Axel Vervoordt brought the painting Sumptuous Still Life with Lobster, Oysters, Silvergilt Covered Beaker, Silver Mounted Kendi Wine Flask and Glassware by Pieter Gerritsz van Roestraten, (21 April 1630 – 10 July 1700), a Dutch Golden Age painter, apprenticed to Frans Hals to TEFAF's fair at the MECC Exhibition and Convention Center in Maastricht. 

Its provenance, stated:

"Doweswell, circa 1900; A. Schloss Collection, Paris; Private Collection, Belgium"

Remarkably, neither the Vervoordt gallery, nor their buyer raised any eyebrows. 

This despite the fact that the painting is recorded in publicly available wartime asset lists as having been taken during World War II from the renowned Schloss Collection, assembled by Adolphe Schloss—a German-Jewish collector whose family holdings, including more than 300 paintings were seized during the Nazi occupation. Documentation related to the Schloss seizure, including official French postwar recovery reports and international claims lists, identified the still life among the numerous works looted from the Schloss family collection. 

The French Ministry of Foreign Affairs even stated where the then holder of the Van Roestraten painting as: "Private collection, Belgium. Castle of 's-Gravenwezel,  the six-story castle home Axel Vervoordt shares with his wife May in Belgium. Deflecting from its non pristine past, Vervoordt sold the painting at the Maastricht fair along with the silver matching ewer which is depicted in the artist's work.  The painting sold for $800,000 to an unnamed European private collector.

Again, not shying away from World War II sensitivities, in 2011,  Le Monde, art critic and correspondent Philippe Dagen reflected on an exhibition curated by Axel Vervoordt at the Palazzo Fortuny in Venice. He noted that while the inaugural Artempo show had been widely admired, and its successor In-Finitum had leaned heavily into a lavish presentation of works associated with Vervoordt, the Belgian's third installment, TRA, included an absurd work by Cuban artist Tania Bruguera: a heavy iron sculpture emblazoned with the phrase: Arbeit macht frei, translated as "Work makes [one] free." 

Those familiar with Belzic's work on identifying stolen artefacts from Cyrenaica,  the region in North Africa located between Roman Egypt and Tripolitania; today it is part of Libya know that his identifications have lead to restitutions, some of which have been discussed on ARCA's blog.  Often, that same research, in favourable jurisdictions, has resulted in restitutions of cultural property to Libya. Note that the absence of a face, or aprosopy, remains without real parallel in any other location in the rest of the Mediterranean world. Likewise, this object's first appearance in circulation on the international art market coincides with the Second Libyan Civil War (2014–2020), which marked a large uptick in material appearing on the art market from illegal digging around Cyrene, near Shahhat, during the country's instability.

Also in 2014, Vervoordt's firm brought a first century BCE South Arabia (Yemen) alabaster Relief of a Male Figure with Elaborate Hairdo and Horns to TEFAF's Maastrich fair.  For that event, the gallerist listed the object's provenance as: "Ancient collection Belgium, acquired in 1940; Ancient collection M. Abdalla Babeker, Sudan, acquired between 1917 and 1930."

It should be noted that "M. Abdalla Babeker" has been identified as a false-collector name which has come up in provenance records linked to stolen artefacts from Sudan circulated and sold by Jaume Bagot, of J. Bagot Arqueología in Barcelona.  That problematic Catalan dealer, frequently discussed on ARCA's blog, is known for having handled stolen Egyptian shabtis of the Pharaoh Taharqa and Senkamanisken which were illegally exported out of North African country and sold onward in the European ancient art market with this same Babeker provenance.

This object was seized by US Customs and Border Protection at the Los Angeles/Long Beach Seaport on 15 June 2016 as part of a 40-item shipment weighing more than 5 tons collectively valued at over $745,000.  A form submitted by a customs broker lists the importer and consignee of the items as "Kim Kardashian dba (doing business as) Noel Roberts Trust," an entity linked to Kim Kardashian and Kanye West’s US real estate purchases.

That same Roman sculpture was photographed at Vervoordt's booth in TEFAF by the Italian Carabinieri on 21 March 2011

"I would consider my visit there most successful. The financial situation being what it is, I was anxious to spend as little money as possible in purchases and get as many pieces on consignment as possible. I am glad to say it worked out better than I expected."

"I bought a beautiful Baphuon female torso from Peng Seng for $ 13'000, a small, but exquisite Baphuon head from Chai Ma for $ 2'000 and four pieces from Douglas Latchford for $ 20'000. These Bangkok purchases, together with a vase from Mayuyama, $ 8'500, bring the grand total of my purchases on this trip to $ 43'500."

"The greater part of my time in Bangkok was spent in numberous [sic] meetings with our friend Douglas, I am getting the following two important pieces on consignment:(they are supposedly already on their way)."

"Pre Angkor Hari Hara, about 35", supposedly recently excavated in Cambodia near the South Vietnamese border, It is a great piece. The selling price will be $ 300'000 or over, still to be decided upon with Latchford."

"Large Koh Ker female torso; another very beautiful and important piece, selling price $ 100 000 or more, to be determined still."

"Douglas has the following 3 bronzes which at this time he is not ready to give me yet, but which I am sure will come in the very near future."

"I have explored extensively with Peng Seng and Latchford how to get legitimate papers for the large Koh Ker guardian and for all subsequent shipments. The following is the best procedure that I can think of at this time:  For the Koh Ker guardian Peng Seng will send us a letter written and signed somebody in Bangkok. He will say that he has seen this piece in Peng Seng's shop three years ago. Peng Seng would like us to give him the exact text we want in this letter. You and I will discuss this when I am in London."

"On all future shipments of important pieces only, both Peng Seng and Latchford, they will ship the pieces the way they have always done, but at more or less the same time will send a modern piece of about the same size and same subject, described on the airway bill in such a way that nobody will know to which this airway bill applies. From my discussions with Sherman Lee I can say that an airway bill which describes the shipment as a sculpture, rather than "personal belongings", would be satisfactory. It also occurred to me that: we are mostly talking about Khmer art from Cambodia, being shipped out of Thailand, which is not the country of origin, this should lessen our problem."

1992 photo of Leonardo Patterson with Pope John Paul II

This morning Arthur Brand posted that Leonardo Augustus Patterson, euphemistically known as a dealer and collector of ancient art, but long accused of trafficking looted pre-Columbian artefacts, has died.  His passing, on 11 February in Bautzen, Germany, at the age of 82, marks the end of a decades-long saga of intrigue, deception, and international investigations conducted by the F.B.I., and the National police in Mexico, Spain, Peru, Guatamala and Germany, all of which centred around his circulation and sale of illicit ancient artefacts as well as forgeries.

Born in Costa Rica to Jamaican parents in 1942, Patterson rose to prominence in the booming, Janus-faced antiquities market of the 1960s and 1970s.  Over the years, he developed a reputation as both a knowledgable connoisseur as well as a trafficker, and occasional dealer in forgeries, who amassed an inventory of ancient artefacts worth millions and maintained homes in New York, Mexico city, and Munch.  Many of the pieces he handled are believed to have been plundered from sites in Costa Rica, El Salvador, Mexico, Guatemala, and Peru, all countries rich in archaeological histories.  

During the 1960s and 1970s, Mesoamerican archaeological sites were subjected to rampant looting, driven in part by an increasingly insatiable global demand for Pre-Columbian material.  In Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, and Belize, ancient Maya, Olmec, and Aztec sites were raided by looters, often referred to as huaqueros who left behind a path of damage or devastation in their wake. 

These individuals, working in well-funded and well-connected trafficking networks, unearthed jade masks, ceramic figurines, jewellery, carved stelae, and codices, stripping important archaeological sites of invaluable movable cultural heritage.  With the rise of private collectors and museum acquisitions in Europe and the United States during this period, many of these black market artefacts ended up in prestigious collections as well as in institutions, purchased through dealers such as Patterson, or those who bought directly from him.

Governments in Mesoamerica responded to their losses with stricter cultural patrimony laws.  Yet ,despite increased legislation, enforcement remained inconsistent.  This in turn allowed the looting to persist, and further resulted in damaging the historical record of what we know and can document about the sites and customs of these ancient civilisations.

Patterson’s dealings in cultural property, on and over the edge of legality, placed him at the centre of legal controversies.  

In his first overt brush with the law, on 21 May 1984, the FBI charged Patterson federally with wire fraud for trying to sell a fake Mayan fresco to an art dealer in Boston.  In that instance he pleaded no contest, contending that he was set up by FBI officers, who he claimed held had a vendetta against him.  Despite the felony conviction, he was sentenced lightly, to probation. 

A year later, and while still on probation for his earlier conviction, Patterson was arrested upon arrival at the Dallas-Fort Worth airport for illegally importing a 650 and 850 CE, pre-Columbian ceramic figure and 36 sea turtle eggs, a violation of the Endangered Species Convention.  In that case, the flamboyant merchant claimed that the pre-Columbian artwork was a newly made souvenir, but openly admitted he planned to consume the eggs as part of his health regimen, even describing how he would eat them.  In his own defense, he stating that he thought he only had to declare the endangered turtle eggs when he arrived at his final destination.  

Leonardo Patterson in his apartment in Munich.

By the 1990s, Patterson had moved away from his repeated US headaches to Europe, relocating to Munich, where he began holding large exhibitions and making sales in France, Germany, and Spain.  There, he befriended and sold ancient art works to a large circle of wealthy collectors and by 1995, was named Costa Rica's cultural attache to the U.N.  Interviewed by the newspaper, Der Spiegel, journalists recorded that at the highest point in his selling career, the extravagant dealer had been chauffeured around the city in a blue Rolls Royce and sponsored his own polo team, which included four players and 12 horses.

In 1995, this also became complicated in Europe, when Patterson's activities were linked publicly in the New York Times to Val Edwards, a successful, if not controversial smuggler.  Edwards told journalists that over the course of a decade he had covertly brought 1000 museum-quality artefacts into the United States which had been plundered from various sites in Guatemala and Mexico.   

With pre-Columbian artworks fetching record prices and while the United States Customs Service officials concentrated on the drug trade, Edwards claimed that he got away with smuggling by posing as a businessman, entering the United States with restaurant equipment and a ready-made alibi that the objects he possessed were cheap tourist reproductions, to be used to decorate a Mexican restaurant he planned to open.  In his ten years of smuggling, Edwards was never arrested, and his bags were only searched once, for drugs. 

Not long after he this link to Edwards was made public, Patterson's honorary role with the UN was revoked.

One of the most important pieces tied to Patterson's illicit activities is this three-foot-wide Mochica headdress of a tentacled zoomorphic sea god.  In was looted from a Moche funerary site in the Jequetepeque valley in northern Peru during a wave of clandestine excavations following the discovery of the famous lord of Sipán tomb.  The artefact had been stolen by a man named Ernil Bernal, who led a band of huaqueros who tunnelled into one of the pyramids located at Huaca Rajada.  Bernal in turn sold the piece to a Peruvian collector named Raul Apesteguia, who later sold the extremely rare artefact to Patterson. 

On 26 January 1996 Apesteguía was robbed, and found beaten to death in his home. Authorities in Peru believe that the collector died at the hands of an antiquities trafficking mob with whom he had been associated.  Though never charged, Patterson's name surfaced as a person of interest in connection to this murder investigation, as objects associated with Apesteguía, including this magnificent gold piece, were identified in circulation with Patterson.

While it is not possible to list all of Patterson's antics in one blog post, here are a few.

In 1997 Patterson staged an exhibition at the Museo do Pobo Galego in Santiago de Compostela in northwestern Spain, sponsored by the Galicia regional government.  During this event, several experts voiced concerns that some of the artefacts might be forgeries, including an Olmec throne described as made of fired clay, something the Olmecs weren't known for. Patterson filed a $63 million defamation lawsuit against the dissenting experts, only to later withdrew his charges.

Peruvian archaeologist Walter Alva, who reviewed a copy of Patterson's museum exhibition catalog, identified more than 250 ancient Peruvian pieces, mostly from tombs raided in the late 1980s, one of which was the gold Peruvian Mochica headdress mentioned earlier. 

In 2004, after receiving a tip, customs officials in Germany targeted an air freight delivery at Frankfort Airport containing archeological artefacts from Mexico and simply waited until Patterson's daughter showed up.  That same year, and based on the contents of Patterson's 1997 exhibit catalogue for the Santiago de Compostela exhibition, and identifications from archaeological experts, Peru issued an arrest warrant for the dealer.

In 2006, and acting on information from Michel van Rijn and Arthur Brand, London's Metropolitan Police successfully recovered the Mochica headdress of a tentacled zoomorphic sea god when Van Rijn posed as a buyer during a visit to the London office of Leonardo Patterson's lawyer. That piece was returned to Peru later that summer. 

Later that same year, on 30 October 2006, Peruvian commander George Gamarra Romero received a confidential email inbox in which Spanish colleagues had notified him that Spanish authorities had a tip that more than a thousand of pieces tied to Patterson were being stored in a moving warehouse in Galicia.  Executing a search warrant in early 2007, police documented rare Mayan and Aztec pieces, Incan gold, and a variety of other pre-Columbian relics were suspected to have been illegally obtained.  As part of this police investigation, and based on a request from Peru, Spain seized 45 Peruvian cultural objects, many of which were determined to have been looted from Sipán and La Mina.

But before Spanish police could investigate the remaining pieces further, Patterson had the rest of the items moved to Munich in March 2007.  Sparking further questions, Patterson disputed the sequester in Spain and claimed that all of the artefacts were part of a loan from German millionaire Anton Roeckl.

As the international cases progressed, German authorities seized more than 1,000 Aztec, Maya, Olmec and Inca antiquities from Patterson in April 2008.  The pieces were packed into more than a hundred crates held in a Munich warehouse.

In September 2011 Patterson was arrested at the Mexico City international airport while traveling to his native Costa Rica based on an Interpol red notice issued by Guatemala and a location order issued in Mexico by the Specialized Unit for Investigation of Crimes against the Environment and Provided for in Special Laws of the PGR, for the alleged crime of theft of archaeological goods and pieces.   In December 2012, a criminal court in Santiago de Compostela put the dealer on trial for violating export regulations relating to cultural artefacts when he moved his collection to Munich.  Unfortunately, Patterson wasn't present at the trial, as a German doctor had issued him a certificate of poor health saying that he was unable to travel. 

Leonard Patterson during the trial in Spain.

On 28th March 2013, at yet another airport, Patterson is again arrested, this time at the Adolfo Suárez Madrid–Barajas Airport in Madrid on the bases of Interpol notices from Guatemala and Peru. While awaiting a decision on extradition to Latin America, he was housed at the Madrid V Penitentiary Center, Soto del Real.

Wanted since 2008, Guatemala's Office of the Public Prosecutor for Crimes against Cultural Heritage requested Patterson's extradition for the crimes of illicit export of cultural property and the illegal possession of 269 looted objects purportedly part of the larger "Patterson Collection" a batch of 1,800 archaeological objects from countries such as Mexico, Guatemala and Peru, which he's exhibited in Santiago de Compostela.  But as the requests progressed, Patterson was released from custody for health reasons 10 months after his arrest in January 2014. Although he had been ordered to remain in Spain, he immediately left for Munich.

Back in Germany,  he racked up another charge, for selling a 10 percent share of an allegedly fake Olmec head (the Olmec were an ancient civilization in Mexico) to a businessman from nearby Starnberg for €85,000.  In that case the Court in Munich found him guilty of "deceptively selling a piece of recent manufacture as an archaeological artefact of Mexican origin to a German citizen" and "possessing looted artefacts."  

Given his advancing age, as is too often the case with elderly lifetime traffickers, Patterson was sentenced in Germany to probation, plus home confinement for three years, ordered to return two wooden Olmec head carvings to Mexico and fined approximately $40,000.  Arthur Brand, a witness in that trial, testified that Patterson had told him that the returned pieces had been taken by a tomb raider from an archaeological dig in El Manatí, Mexico, a sacred site of the Olmec people. 

In his 2016 interview with Der Speigel, Patterson openly elaborated on his business model, and admitted to working with Mexican intermediaries who travelled to Munich on a regular basis. "They worked together with the illegal excavators," he stated. "Their focus was on fresh goods, primarily because of the prices. They had to know where digging was currently going on. They always got it at the place where it was found. They knew the people in the villages."

Patterson’s death leaves many questions unanswered about the final fate of the thousands of artefacts he once controlled.  While some have been returned to their countries of origin, many others remain in legal limbo, or in the hands of private collectors, some of whom are unaware of—or indifferent to—their questionable provenance.

A Paris warehouse of Patterson's merchandise.

Noting his death today, some say, why not let the dead rest? I myself disagree, as this man certainly didn't.

By Lynda Albertson

On June 15, 2023, a federal grand jury in the Middle District of Pennsylvania indicted Nicholas Dombek, Damien Boland, Joseph Atsus and his brother Alfred Atsus for their alleged involvement in a widespread art and memorabilia theft ring that spanned over two decades and targeted 19 museums and other venues in six states and the District of Columbia.

The charges against the men included conspiracy to commit theft of major artwork, concealment or disposal of cultural artefacts, and interstate transportation of stolen property.  Each defendant also faced additional counts related to the theft and concealment of significant cultural objects, with Dombek receiving an extra charge for transporting stolen property across state lines.

The objects taken during the series of breakins included:

Those objects included:

A Christy Mathewson jersey and two contracts signed by Mathewson stolen in 1999 from Keystone College in Factoryville, Pennsylvania;

“Le Grande Passion” by Andy Warhol and “Springs Winter” by Jackson Pollock stolen in 2005 from the Everhart Museum, Scranton, Pennsylvania;

Nine (9) World Series rings, seven (7) other championship rings, and two (2) MVP plaques awarded to Yogi Berra, worth over $1,000,000 stolen in 2014 from the Yogi Berra Museum & Learning Center, Little Falls, New Jersey;

Six (6) championship belts, including four awarded to Carmen Basilio and two awarded to Tony Zale stolen in 2015 from the International Boxing Hall of Fame, Canastota, New York;

The Hickok Belt and MVP Trophy awarded to Roger Maris, stolen in 2016 from the Roger Maris Museum, Fargo, North Dakota;

The U.S. Amateur Trophy and a Hickok Belt awarded to Ben Hogan, stolen in 2012 from the USGA Golf Museum & Library, Liberty Corner, New Jersey;

Fourteen (14) trophies and other awards worth over $300,000 stolen in 2012 from the Harness Racing Museum & Hall of Fame, Goshen, New York;

Five (5) trophies worth over $400,000, including the 1903 Belmont Stakes Trophy, stolen in 2013 from the National Racing Museum & Hall of Fame, Saratoga Springs, New York;

Eleven (11) trophies, including 4 awarded to Art Wall, Jr. stolen in 2011 from the Scranton Country Club, Clarks Summit, Pennsylvania;

Three antique firearms worth a combined $1,000,000 stolen in 2006 from Space Farms: Zoo & Museum, Wantage, New Jersey;

An 1903/1904 Tiffany Lamp stolen in 2010 from the Lackawanna Historical Society, Scranton, Pennsylvania,

“Upper Hudson” by Jasper Cropsey, worth approximately $500,000, and two antique firearms worth over $300,000, stolen in 2011 from Ringwood Manor, Ringwood, New Jersey;

$400,000 worth of gold nuggets stolen in 2011 from the Sterling Hill Mining Museum, Ogdensburg, New Jersey;

Various gems, minerals, and other items stolen in 2017 from the Franklin Mineral Museum, Franklin, New Jersey;

An antique shotgun worth over $30,000 stolen in 2018 from Space Farms: Zoo & Museum, Wantage, New Jersey;

Various jewelry, and other items from multiple antique and jewelry stores in New York, Rhode Island, and Pennsylvania.

The prosecution's case relied heavily on the testimony of Thomas Trotta, 49, a former resident of Moscow, Pennsylvania, who law enforcement identified as the ringleader behind the theft operation.  Prior to pleading guilty, state police had used newly acquired DNA evidence to link Trotta to several burglaries which ultimately resulted in him cooperating with state police and the FBI, informing detectives of the extent and scope of the gang's activities.

During his testimony, Trotta spoke of the destruction of the memorbilia for its base metal price, despite the fact that the objects were symbols of legacy.  In providing detailed accounts of the thefts during the trial of his associates, Trotta's testimony highlighted how the group of museum thieves stole the nine World Series rings, trying them on before they set about prying the gemstones out of them, then melting them down, along with the metal on the plaques in his garage.   His cooperation, although controversial, was pivotal in securing the convictions. 

Unfortunately, as this one described incident details, many of the items stolen are not recoverable as the were converted into metal discs or bars which the theft ring then sold in New York for the raw metals. 

Despite this, the trial's outcome has been met with a sense of justice by the numerous law enforcement agencies who worked on this multi-state investigation, including the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the Pennsylvania State Police, the New Jersey State Police, the New York State Police, the New Jersey State Park Police, the Newport Police Department (Rhode Island), the Fargo Police Department (North Dakota), the Chester Police Department (New York), the Wyoming Regional Police Department (Pennsylvania), the Scranton Police Department, the Franklin Police Department (New Jersey), the Village of Goshen Police Department (New York), the Metropolitan Police Department (Washington, D.C.), the West Milford Township Police Department (New Jersey), the Montclair Police Department (New Jersey), the Saratoga Springs Police Department (New York), the Canastota Police Department (New York), the South Abington Police Department (Pennsylvania), the Bernards Township Police Department (New Jersey), the Salisbury Township Police Department (Pennsylvania), the Montclair State University Police Department (New Jersey), the Lackawanna County District Attorney’s Office (Pennsylvania), the Sussex County Prosecutor’s Office (New Jersey), the Essex County Prosecutor’s Office (New Jersey), the Orange County District Attorney’s Office (New York), and the Madison County District Attorney’s Office (New York).  

While stolen memorabilia may not hold immense financial value, their historical and cultural significance still makes their loss irreplaceable.  Many of the objects targeted in ring's museum thefts, such as the championship belts, or award rings, carry deep personal and societal meaning, a value which cannot be calculated simply, and which transcends their monetary worth alone. These sports-related objects serve as tangible connections to the past, preserving the stories and achievements of their respective award winners, and these individual's importance within their communities. 

When stolen and melted down, these pieces of history are lost forever—depriving future generations of their educational and cultural importance. 

To read more on this case, check out this article by Ariel Sabar. 

By Edgar Tijhuis*

Introduction

Dr. Noah Charney founded ARCA in 2006 while still a postgraduate student. He will lecture during ARCA's summer training programmes on his area of expertise: the motives and methods of forgers.

How did you get into art crime?

I became interested in art crime during my postgraduate studies in London at The Courtauld Institute, where I pursued an MA in art history. Initially torn between playwrighting and art history, I chose the latter after encouragement from professors who felt playwrighting could be self-taught.

While studying, I combined my love of art and writing, gaining experience through summer jobs at Christie’s and the Yale British Arts Center. Around this time, The Da Vinci Code and The Thomas Crown Affair remake inspired me to write my debut novel, The Art Thief, blending suspense with accurate art-world research. Its success enabled me to become a full-time writer.

What led you to the concept of an association dedicated to studying art crime?

Researching The Art Thief revealed art crime as an underdeveloped academic field with little structured study.  As I began a PhD at Cambridge on the history of art theft, I organised the first-ever art crime conference, bringing together law enforcement agencies working in the field, including folks with the FBI, Metropolitan Police, the Carabinieri, and academics, thinking academics, art historians, museum professionals, art conservators, and archaeologists could help inform future police enforcement.

The conference gained unexpected attention when The New York Times Magazine featured it, labelling me as a trailblazer pioneer in the field. This success led me to establish ARCA (the Association for Research into Crimes against Art) to bring together and to connect specialists and to promote the serious study of art crime. At the time, there were only a few dozen experts in the field, and no specialised training programs, so I decided we needed to create one. 

What has ARCA achieved?

ARCA has significantly advanced art crime studies. In 2009, we launched the first postgraduate program focused on art crime, held in a picturesque Italian town. The same year, we introduced The Journal of Art Crime, the first peer-reviewed journal in this focused area and hosted the first annual "Amelia" art crime conference.

Many of our forensic analysts and directors in allied sectors. We’ve expanded into documentaries, partnerships with companies like Samsung, and recently launched a book series with Bloomsbury.

Initially, ARCA was a homemade effort from me and my wife, but overtime many others got involved and took over the leadership of ARCA, allowing me to focus on teaching and advocacy.

Today, ARCA continues to grow, connecting academia, law enforcement, and the art world to deepen everyone's understanding of art crime.

What is the purpose of the course you are teaching this summer?

I teach a concise course on art forgery, a subject of my book The Art of Forgery (2015).  A new edition is due in late 2025 with Bloomsbury.

Forgery is a fascinating topic, filled with quirky characters and surprising stories. My approach was the first to apply a criminological framework to what had been anecdotal studies of individual forgers. One concept I developed is “the provenance trap,” which highlights how criminals manipulate provenance research to deceive experts into authenticating forgeries.

Which forger fascinates you the most?

Lothar Malskat stands out for his humorous story. He included hidden “time bombs” in his forged medieval frescoes, such as a turkey and a portrait of Marlene Dietrich, to prove he was a forger. Determined to expose himself, he even sued himself, acting as both the defendant and the prosecution!

Amelia is an idyllic Umbrian hilltop town. I discovered it while teaching at Yale University, where their Italian language program was transitioning to Siena. Amelia sought a new academic program, and it was a perfect fit for ARCA.

The town is small enough that our students and professors bring economic and cultural liveliness. It’s ancient, charming, and not overly touristy, offering an authentic Italian experience. Our participants often feel “adopted” by the locals and return frequently to visit.

Amelia is also close to Rome yet affordable, making it an ideal location for our program as it keeps the costs down.  Even best-selling author Daniel Silva, whose protagonist is an art restorer, used to summer here and set a scene in one of his novels at the city's local gelateria.

What is special about this program?

Our programme was groundbreaking when it launched and remains the most comprehensive interdisciplinary programming in art and antiquities crime out there.  It combines group and individualised classroom learning with the experience of living in a beautiful Italian town.

We organize amazing field classes which are connected to the courses, evaluating risk management at museums and exploring endangered Etruscan tombs. It’s a unique blend of intense academia and real-world experiences.

Which course would you like to take yourself?

I’d love to take all the courses, but if I had to choose, it would be Tasha Dobbin Bennett’s. She’s a professor at Oxford College at Emory University and an accomplished Egyptologist and bioarchaeologist. After completing our program herself, she joined our faculty, and her course is a fantastic addition.

Any advice for participants coming to Amelia?

Just go for it. It will be one of the most enriching summers of your life, both academically and personally. And don’t forget to enjoy the cappuccinos!

* Edgar Tijhuis is the Academic Director of ARCA. 

February 2013 

Castello di Buriasco

According to her report to law enforcement officers, the painting's owner recounted that at some point, an unknown person or persons had apparently entered the castle she owned and had cut the painting in question from its frame, removing it at an undetermined date.  In its place, the resourceful thief or thieves are said to have replaced the removed canvas with a large photocopy of the work, re-stapling the reproduction back into the original frame.

At a much later date, it will later be determined that the thief or thieves, who cut the artwork from its frame, accidentally left behind a small triangular fragment from the painting's original canvas.  This painted scrap will later be found, stuck between the replacement image and the painting's frame which was rehung at the crime site. 

According to the victim of the theft, a person by the name of Paolo Bocedi, identified from open source media on the internet as an entrepreneur in Lombardia who founded S.O.S. Italia Libera together with Tano Grasso in 1991 had twice visited the Castello di Buriasco in an attempt to purchase the painting, however Signora Buzio declined to sell. 

Date Unknown

Following the report of theft filed with the Carabinieri in Vigone, a theft notice regarding the painting stolen from the Castello di Buriasco is sent by Italy's National Central Bureau to the Interpol Works of Art Unit.   The identikit details of which are uploaded to Interpol's ID-Art App, making the image of the stolen artwork searchable by the general public. 

The INTERPOL stolen works of art database refers to the stolen painting as a 17th century painting of The Judgement of St. Paul by the School of Francesco Solimena, (L'Abate Ciccio).

Spring 2013

According to later journalistic investigations made public in December 2023 by investigative reporters Thomas Mackinson it is claimed that Vittorio Sgarbi, Italy's Undersecretary of Culture in the Meloni Cabinet, contacted Gianfranco Mingardi in the Spring of 2013 telling the Brescia-based restorer: 

"I'll send you a painting to fix".  

Sgarbi has worked extensively with Mingardi periodically in the conservation of artworks from the 1980s until quite recently.

8 May 2013

According to one of Mackinson's article regarding this evolving story, the restorer Gianfranco Mingardi recounted that three months after the theft of the painting from the Castello di Buriasco, on May 8, 2013 he received a painting requiring restoration which was the purported to be property of Vittorio Sgarbi.  Like the artwork stolen from the Castello di Buriasco and uploaded to the Interpol database, the painting requiring restoration depicted its protagonist, with his hands clasped and his face turned upwards as a sign of supplication, as he is forcibly brought by two guardsmen, before a judge, who is depicted pointing with his right arm raised.  

Mingardi told newspaper reporters that he had picked up this painting at the exit of the A4 motorway, in central Brescia in the northern Italian region of Lombardy, adding that he met a delivery truck, along with Paolo Bocedi, who arrived by  motorcycle.  It should be noted that this is the same individual who was was mentioned by Margherita Buzio as the person who had previously contacted her about the purchase of her painting before the artwork was stolen.

At the handover, the restorer Mingardi stated that the painting was delivered to him "without a frame, cut, and rolled up like a carpet".  Once laid out and spread open, the restorer says he observed several parts of the artwork which showed breaks and canvas losses.  

Having taken photos of the artwork at the time it was delivered, Mingardi was able to demonstrate to the journalists that at the time he received the canvas, the painting was rolled up like a scroll and appeared to be in poor condition.  His documentation also showed that at the time the painting was under his care, it did not yet depict a torch in the top left quadrant of the painting's imagery.  

This purported augmentation is thought to have been added at some later date.  

Photo of rolled atwork taken by restorer Gianfranco Mingardi

Also of note in the restorer's photographic documentation is a prominent horizontal line that runs along the entire length of the painting at the point where the two canvases are cojoined at the ground layer,.  This is a common system or merger which allowed artists of the period to create larger format paintings.  Lastly, Mingardi's records identify a series of losses, including a hole in the canvas at the height of the dog's collar, as well as a crack along one tunic and other similar losses. 

10 December 2018

Gianfranco Mingardi tells news journalist Thomas Mackinson that he returned Vittorio Sgarbi's painting to the art critic on 10 December 2018, a full five and a half years after it was received. 

“I realised that that canvas was hot, so I asked him [Vittorio Sgarbi] for a certificate of ownership...He said he would send it to me but he didn't, and when I protested he said not to worry, he could say that it was in Villa Maidalchina..." 

April 2019 

Vittorio Sgarbi's painting depicting its protagonist, with his hands clasped and his face turned upwards as a sign of supplication is now said to be at the studio of Valentina Piovan, an established restorer from Padua. 

Why the artwork was taken to a second restorer is unclear.  What should be noted is that by this time period, Sgarbi's painting now contains an added element, a lighted torch which serves to illuminate the top left quadrant of the painting's imagery. 

October 2020

Samuele and Cristian De Pietri, the owners of GraphicLAB s.n.c. di De Pietri Cristian & Co., collect Vittorio Sqarbi's painting from the studio of restorer Valentina Piovan at the beginning of October 2020 

13 October 2020

Samuele and Cristian De Pietri, the owners of GraphicLAB s.n.c. di De Pietri Cristian & Co create a digitised, contactless scan of Vittorio Sqarbi's painting using a high quality, large format scanner capable of scanning large format works of art and then cloning them. 

22 November 2020

Vittorio Sgarbi visits the laboratory of GraphicLAB s.n.c. di De Pietri Cristian & Co in person, who, according to the owners "was interested in understanding the potential of our machinery, how far it could go. From there we then do many other jobs, for various museums and around Italy." 

Photos and videos are taken where Sgarbi can be seen discussing the original painting left in G-Lab's care, alongside the cloned work created by the business associates.  Both images appear to closely resemble the stolen painting from the Castello di Buriasco. 

These images and video are later shared with the journalists working for Il Fatto Quotidiano and the Rai television program "Report" who release them to the public in 2024.  In the film, Sgarbi can be seen wandering between the original version of the Capture of Saint Peter and its digital clone, examining each of them closely, with a flashlight in his hand moving over key areas of the artwork.

On 12 January 2021 

Vittorio Sgarbi pays a €6100 invoice issued by GraphicLAB s.n.c. di De Pietri Cristian & Co. which labeled their service as a "consultancy."  According to the business owners, the original version of Vittorio Sgarbi's painting and its digital clone were subsequently transferred to the care of the Cavallini-Sgarbi Foundation (Ro Ferrarese, Ferrara). However, their original 3D scan file, which digitally captured the scan of the 17th century painting at 1600 DPI resolution (meaning that for every inch of mouse movement, the cursor moves 1600 pixels), and weighing 52 gigabytes, remained with the digitisation company's owners, Samuele and Cristian De Pietri.

8 December 2021 through 2 October 2022

The art exhibition I Pittori della Luce. Da Caravaggio a Paolini, curated by Vittorio Sgarbi and produced by Contemplazioni takes place at the Padiglione Panini - Ex Cavallerizza in the historic center of Lucca.  At this exhibition, Sqarbi exhibits the painting he had commissioned to be cloned earlier at GraphicLAB s.n.c. di De Pietri Cristian & Co. 

According to the accompanying exhibition catalogue, written by Sgarbi and Professor Ciampolini, the 235 x 204 cm, oil on canvas painting is now titled The Capture of Saint Peter (Italian: Cattura di San Pietro) and is written up as a previously "unpublished" artwork, believed to have been completed by the artist Rutilio di Lorenzo Manetti (c. 1571 – 22 July 1639), sometime between 1637 and 1639.  Manetti being an Italian painter of late-Mannerism or proto-Baroque, active mainly in Siena.  

Sgarbi's catalogue as well as accompanying exhibition documentation lists the artwork as being the property of the Cavallini Sgarbi Foundation.  Regarding its provenance, the exhibition's catalogue states that the painting was found at the Villa Maidalchina, which in the 1600s was owned by Olimpia Pamphilij, sister-in-law of Pope Innocent.  The previously abandoned villa is located near La Quiete, in the La Pila district, near Viterbo.  Built between 1615 and 1625 this once abandoned villa is now the property of the Cavallini Sgarbi Foundation. 

Sgarbi's catalogue goes on to state that his painting "is remembered, generically among others paintings, in the inventory of 11 October 16-49, drawn up by the notary Cosimo Pennacchi, of the assets of Andrea Maidalchini, Olimpia's brother. The works of art, including the famous Bust of Innocent X by Alessandro Algardi, then passed to Giulio Bussi and the Gentili counts."  

According to research conduced by journalists, there is no affirming documentation which concretises these attestations.  In fact quite the contrary, Angelo Allegrini, the Director of the State archives of Viterbo, failed to identify any record of any works of art by the artist Manetti in the bound 1649 records of Pennacchi.  And while there is a record of a painting depicting Saint Peter recorded, that work of art describes the presence of a handmaid, who is not depicted in the work of art in Sgarbi's hands.  

The catalogue further describes the paintings light source as follows: 

"a precise light source, coming from the top left, emphasising the dramatic tone of the agitated scene, enhancing the material values of the clothes and skin and creating suggestive light and backlight effects. A torch, remembered by Honthor Stano, illuminates a room to the left of Herod, creating a symmetry with the scenographic background of the road on the right. There is an evident Caravaggesque origin, which the painter combines with a pursued theatrical taste, in the general layout, as in the individual characters, unnaturally elongated to emphasize their 'dancing pace' way of acting."

Late 2021/Early 2022

By late 2021 Vittorio Sqarbi's painting depicting the Capture of Saint Peter has drawn the attention of investigative journalists Thomas Mackinson and Manuele Bonaccorsi working for Il Fatto Quotidiano and the Rai television program "Report" based upon its similarities to the painting stolen from the Castello di Buriasco (Pinerolo), owned by Margherita Buzio and publicly searchable via the Interpol Id-Art app for stolen artwork. 

Driven by demand from patrons and commissions it was not unusual for artists of the 16th and 17th century to have created multiple versions of a particular theme or to emulate aspects of one another's artist's style.  While each of those are highly plausible, it would have been quite impossible for artists of that period to have matched brush stroke for brush stroke, precisely the proportions as you see below, in this ARCA's overlay of both the stolen painting and the one exhibited at the early exhibition I Pittori della Luce. Da Caravaggio a Paolini, in Lucca.

Aside from the lighted torch element, which illuminates the architectural backdrop on the upper left side, the painting owned by the Cavallini Sgarbi Foundation is objectively identically proportioned character by character to the painting stolen from the Buriasco Castle.  

One could argue, as Vittorio Sgarbi later does, that the stolen painting was a much later replica of his painting,  however that still would not explain the absence/occurrence of the lit torch, and again, how the artisan who replicated the work would have precisely matched the brush strokes in such an extracting way. 

By December 2023

By December 2023 GraphicLAB s.n.c. di De Pietri Cristian & Co., owned by Samuele and Cristian De Pietri, have invoiced undersecretary for cultural heritage Vittorio Sgarbi for a reported 20 thousand euros for the high end cloning and printing of "material reproductions" of paintings.  

These include not only the Capture of Saint Peter, but five other cloned artworks. The latest invoice, paid by Vittorio Sgarbi is dated December 2023. 

After 08 Dicembre 2023 

Stopped outside the Lucca exhibition, Antonio Canova e il Neoclassicismo  journalists investigating the similarities between the stolen painting a the Sgarbi foundation artwork attempt to speak with Undersecretary Vitttorio Sgarbi abouthis foundation's painting and the similarities to the artwork stolen in 2013.  Caught on tape, reporters ask the politician to explain the torch depicted in the Manetti artwork, and the fact that experts state that this is a more recent addition not previously found in the painting when it was worked on by the restorer Gianfranco Mingardi. 

At first Sgarbi hurriedly brushes off the reporters questions, hurling various insults before seating himself in a waiting car with driver.  Very shortly after however, he steps out of the vehicle and reengages with the journalists and camera man somewhat aggressively.  

Speaking in a frustrated or angry tone, he provides further statements regarding the artwork in question while still continuing to hurl colourful vulgarities at the journalists.  He also tells the reporters dismissively that he has sold the painting in question.  At the conclusion of their exchange, Sgarbi takes his leave wishing the journalists a premature death, then denouncing them to the police for stalking.

NB: It should be noted that the PDF for the Lucca exhibition two years earlier already stated that the artwork, at the time of the exhibition, was owned by the Cavallini Sgarbi Foundation. 

15 December 2023

In the first of multiple news articles journalists with Il Fatto Quotidiano begin reporting on their questions regarding the seventeenth-century painting in the Cavallini Sgarbi Foundation collection which they suspect matches the one stolen in 2013 from the Castello di Buriasco.

17 December 2023

The seventeenth-century Cavallini Sgarbi Foundation painting, titled the Capture of Saint Peter is highlighted in the investigative TV program "Report" in Italy, appearing in the first of multiple episodes on the 17th of December ".  In this first reporting, TV journalist Manuele Bonaccorsi walks his viewers through the story of the theft of the artwork from the Castello di Buriasco (Pinerolo) owned by Margherita Buzio as well as its similarities to the artwork titled The Capture of Saint Peter by the artist Rutilio di Lorenzo Manetti owned by Vittorio Sgarbi's foundation.  

The episode covers the paintings passage from restorer to restorer and the digital scanning firm where it was cloned.  It also discusses the curatorial text listed for the artwork when it was presented at the Lucca exhibition which stated the presence of the work in Villa Maidalchina and that the painting would be certified by a notarial deed from 1649. 

The episode goes on to show that a cross check of the State archives of Viterbo, which contains an inventory of Andrea Maidalchini's assets, drawn up in 1649, and which details various paintings from the collection, makes no mention of any work of art by Manetti.  While this inventory does mention, a painting of Saint Peter, the description does not match the paintings under consideration. 

7 January 2023

By comparing an image obtained by a visitor to the Lucca exhibition of the seventeenth-century Cavallini Sgarbi Foundation painting, the investigative TV program "Report" demonstrates that the purported Manetti painting exhibited in Lucca in 2022 appears to be one of the digital clones created by GraphicLAB s.n.c. di De Pietri Cristian & Co. in 2020, after the original artwork was scanned on behalf of undersecretary Vittorio Sgarbi.

High resolution screenshon of G-Lab scan of Sgrabi's artwork

The news program and the newspaper Il Fatto Quotidiano publish high resolution images of the scanned artwork, which, by increasing the magnification shows their respective audiences Sgarbi's painting's craquelure, the fine pattern of dense cracking that develops over many decades or centuries, exhibiting irregular patterns. 

Conservators and appraisers of fine art will recognise that the pattern of craquelure on the surface of paintings are one of many factors which can be used to determine the age, the authenticity, and the restoration works conducted of a painting.  In this case, the fine irregular pattern of dense cracking from the drying oil paint can be seen across Sgarbi's entire painting, but is absent from several of the areas where the artwork has been retouched or overpainted during its restoration.  These changes can be visualised in both the area where the torch appears, indicating it may have been added, as well as in areas where losses were documented earlier while the painting was with the Brescia restorer. 

Loss and Restoration Comparison to Sgarbi painting

Comparing the very high resolution image preserved at GLab's studio, alongside the corresponding images of the artwork without the torch previously obtained from the Brecia restorer Gianfranco Mingardi, along with the other details uncovered or contradicted throughout this journalistic investigation, it seems to be quite possible that the Cavallini Sgarbi Foundation painting of the Capture of Saint Peter could very well be the same stolen painting, with subsequent enhancements, which had from Castello di Buriasco.

Key to this investigation may be a tiny triangular shred of canvas that the reporters found at the castello in Buriasco, stuck between the plastic replacement photo and the frame left at the "crime site".   Turned over to the Caravinieri TPC in Rome on December 20th, this small, seemingly inconsequential scrap, appears to have once been attached to the bottom right portion of the painting, around the area where the three tipped halberd is depicted placed on the ground.  If this proves to be true,  the reporters' journalistic  hypothesis that Sgarbi's painting is the one stolen in 2013 may proven to be true. 

Sgarbi, in his defense, has claimed that multiple copies of this theme were created by Manetti and that Mingardi, who also did work for his mother and had previously completed a job badly and perhaps, as a result, was harbouring revenge against the family.  He has given no explanation as to why, if their relationship was so acrimonious, that he still elected to entrust this rare 17th century artwork by Manetti to the restorer who held the artwork for more than five years given the claim that his restoration work was deemed so problematic in the past that the art critic had refused payment. 

Regardless, even if we play devil's advocate and assume, through some incredibly rare and almost unbelievable stroke of good luck, that the art critic Sgarbi truly was smiled upon by the luck of the Irish and found this valuable 17th century painting in his foundation's previously abandoned villa near Viterbo, one still has to ponder following questions, including: 

Why would an important art critic, and undersecretary to Italy's Ministry of Culture not provide any concretised evidence that substantiates his claim that the artwork was found at Villa Maidalchina.  As an art historian well-versed in the need for provenance, one has to ask why there are no witnesses named as being present at the time of the discovery, or are we to assume Sgarbi was working on his mother's villa renovations personally?

Why is it that Sgarbi considers the St. Peter mentioned in the inventory of 11 October 16-49, drawn up by the notary Cosimo Pennacchi, of the assets of Andrea Maidalchini to be the painting he now possesses, when that inventory description  describes an artwork which depicts the presence of a handmaid when there are no female figures in the Manetti owned by Sgarbi.  

Why has Sgarbi repeatedly stated that the artist Manetti made multiple copies of this work, yet failed, in his detailed telling of the artwork for the Lucca exhibition, failed to document any of these additional copies be they by Manetti himself or a 19th century copiest as he now claims the stolen artwork to be.  All this notwithstanding that fact that Sgarbi himself admitted to having firsthand knowledge of the one hanging at the Castello di Buriasco and having seen it when he lunched at the restaurant and commented on the painting. 

Update: First week of January 2024

The Italian New services now state that Undersecretary of Culture Vittorio Sgarbi is being investigated by Italian authorities as a suspect in the crime of Self-Laundering of Cultural Assets referred to in Article 1(1)(b) of Law No. 22 of the Criminal Code (C.C. art. 518-septies) .  This investigation seems to fall under the jurisdiction of the Public Prosecutor's Office of Macerata and was confirmed via public prosecutor Giovanni Fabrizio Narbone.  

This is unrelated to another investigation, originally opened in 2023 by Alberto Lari, the Imperia prosecutor's office in relation to an earlier investigation into the illegal expropriation of another artwork, the Concerto con Bevitore by Valentin de Boulogne to Monaco.